1 Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 06.07.2026 Date of uploading : 14.07.2026 APHC010627952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE 6th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 32829/2025 Between: 1. MAHIBULLAH KHAN, S/O AMEERUDDIN KHAN, AGED 57, OCC. BUSINEES, R/O H.NO 7-6/6-15/6 PRAKASH NAGAR COLONY, SRIKAKULAM 2. SHAIK MUBARAK, S/O BASHEER MOHAMMED, AGED 51, OCC. BUSINEES, R/O H.NO. 7-79D, SANAVEEDHI, SRIKAKULAM ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE A P STATE WAQF BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 4TH FLOOR, IMDADGHAR COMPLEX, KALESWARA RAO MARKET, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520001. 3. THE INSPECTOR AUDITOR WAQF, SRIKAKULAM ZONE, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. SHEIK NIZAMUDDIN, PRESIDENT, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5. BAHADUR BASHA, VICE- PRESIDENT, MANAGEMENT 2 COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 6. ABDUL RAHIMAN, SECRETARY, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 7. SHEIK SALEEM, JOINT SECRETARY-1, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 8. ABDUL GAFAR KHAN, JOINT SECRETARY-2, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 9. MEERASADULLA, TREASURER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 10. MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM, MEMBER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 11. SHEIK SHAN BASHA, MEMBER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 12. ZULFIKAR ALI BAIG, MEMBER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 13. MOHAMMAD RAFI, MEMBER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 14. ABDUL RASHEED, MEMBER, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, JAMIA MASJID, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the impugned proceedings F.No.12/SKLM/K/20 07/Z- Supple and 3 F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z-V both dated 28-10-2025 by constituting the management Committee of the Waqf Institution namely Jamia Masjid, situated at G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town and District of the Respondents 4 to 14 and also rejecting the representations dated 05/03/2025 and 17/03/2025 of the petitioners to constitute the Management Committee as arbitrary, illegal without authority and in violation of Regulation 5 of A.P.Waqfs Managing Committee (constitution, functions and duties) Regulations 2009 Dated 15/02/2010, Section 18 of Wakf Act, 1995, Article 14 of Constitution of India and Principles of Natural Justice and consequently to set-aside the impugned Proceedings in F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z- Supple and F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z-V both dated 28-10-2025 by the 2nd respondent and consequently to direct the 2nd Respondent to conduct elections to the management committee of Jamia Masjid, situated at G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town and District forthwith as per Regulation 5 of A.P. Waqfs Managing Committee (constitution, functions and duties) Regulations 2009 Dated 15/02/2010 in the interest of justice and pas IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass interim suspension of the impugned proceedings F.No.12/SKLM/K/20 07/Z-Supple and F.N0.I2/SKLM/K/2OO7/Z-V both dated 28-10-2025 by constituting the management Committee of the Waqf Institution namely Jamia Masjid, situated at G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town and District and rejecting petitioners applications dated 05/03/2025 and 17/03/2025 forthwith, pending disposal of the above Writ petition in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the impugned proceedings F.No.12/SKLM/K/20 07/Z- Supple and F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z-V both dated 28-10-2025 by constituting the management Committee of the Waqf Institution namely Jamia Masjid, situated at G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town & District of the Respondents 4 to 14 and also rejecting the representations dated 05/03/2025 and 17/03/2025 of the petitioners to constitute the Management Committee as arbitrary, illegal without authority and in violation of Regulation 5 of A.P. Waqfs Managing Committee (constitution, functions and duties) Regulations 2009 Dated 4 15/02/2010, Section 18 of Wakf Act, 1995, Article 14 of Constitution of India and Principles of Natural Justice and consequently to set-aside the impugned Proceedings in F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z- Supple and F.No.12/SKLM/K/2007/Z-V both dated 28-10-2025 by the 2nd respondent and consequently to direct the 2nd Respondent to conduct elections to the management committee of Jamia Masjid, situated at G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town & District forthwith as per Regulation 5 of A.P. Waqfs Managing Committee (constitution, functions and duties) Regulations 2009 Dated 15/02/2010 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SHAFATH AHMED KHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MD SALEEM PASHA SC For A.P.State Waqf Board for SKM,VSP 2. 3. VYAS VENKATESH The Court made the following order: The present writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent vide 28.10.2025 appointing the unofficial respondents as Managing Committee of Jamia Masjid, G.T.Road, Srikakulam Town and District. 2. The facts that led to filing this writ petition, in brief, are as follows: The Jamia Masjid (subject masjid) is registered Waqf institution managed by the A.P.State Waqf Board. The Waqf Board is appointing the Managing Committee from time to time to the subject mosque and accordingly constituted the petitioners committee by proceedings dated 03.04.2023 as per Section 18 of Waqf Act, 1995 for a period of two years which will be expired on 02.04.2025. 5 It is the case of the petitioners that, they had submitted two representations dated 05.03.2025 & 17.03.2025 along with their panel of 11 members including 2nd petitioner with a request to constitute a Management Committee of the subject mosque. The respondent nos.4 to 14 also has submitted representation with their 11 members panel to constitute Management of the subject Mosque. When there are two applications with two separate panels pending, the 2nd respondent is duty bound to conduct elections by invoking Regulation 5 of A.P.Waqfs Managing Committee (constitution, functions and duties) Regulations, 2009 (for short, „Regulations, 2009‟) to the subject mosque. It is the further case of the petitioners that, without conducting any elections, without conducting any enquiry, the 2nd respondent has rejected the petitioners applications on the ground that there are some allegations against them and issued proceedings dated 28.10.2025 appointing unofficial respondents as Managing committee of the subject mosque. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard Sri Shafath Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Md.Saleem Pasha, learned Standing Counsel for Waqf Board (2nd respondent). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit contended that, when there are two applications with two separate panels pending, the 2nd respondent is duty bound to conduct 6 elections by invoking Regulation 5 of Regulations, 2009 but without conducting elections, the 2nd respondent has straight away issued the impugned proceedings dated 28.10.2025 appointing unofficial respondents as Managing committee of the subject mosque and thereby rejected the petitioners application on the ground that there are some allegations against them. He further submitted that, as against the allegations, the 2nd respondent has to conduct an enquiry as per Section 67 of the Waqf Act, 1995 but without conducting any enquiry against the allegations, they have rejected the petitioners applications without giving cogent reasons. Hence, the impugned proceedings are in contravention of Regulation no.5 of Regulations, 2009 and Section 67 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and accordingly prayed to set aside the impugned proceedings. 5. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel on instructions submitted that, when the petitioners were committee members, they have committed irregularities, they have cut the sandal wood trees in the burial ground premises of subject mosque and on some unauthorized construction on the roof of shopping complex which belongs to the subject mosque, an FIR was also registered against them. He further submitted that, in view of the same, the 2nd respondent has not considered the petitioners applications and did not even extend their tenure. He further submitted that, since the unofficial respondents are also musallies and there are no allegations and rival group against them, they were appointed as Managing committee of the subject mosque vide proceedings dated 28.10.2025. He further submitted that, since 7 the petitioners applications were rejected, only the unofficial respondents were left for appointment, therefore, there is no requirement for conducting elections. He further submitted that petitioners have suppressed the facts about the crime registered against them and approached this court with unclean hands, as such the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed even without inviting counter. 6. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, there is no crime registered against the petitioners as on date of filing of this writ petition and only to overcome their action they falsely implicated the petitioners in the criminal case and only to deny the rights of the petitioners to continue as managing committee and also to avoid the elections. 7. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. 8. The grievance of the petitioners is that, though there are two applications with two separate panels, without conducting elections as per the provisions of the A.P.Waqf Act and its Rules and Regulations, 2009 the petitioners application were rejected. It can be seen that the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents filed applications for appointment of Managing committee to the subject mosque. Further, the petitioner‟s applications have been rejected on the ground that they have committed certain irregularities while they were appointed as managing committee earlier. 8 9. Regulation 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Waqfs Managing Committee (Constitution Functions and Duties), Regulations, 2009 envisages the method of Constitution of Managing Committee. The same reads as under: “ Regulation – 5: Method of Constitution of Managing Committee: The Managing Committee for a waqf/waqf Institution may be constituted in the following manner: i) Approving the panel unanimously selected by the Musallies and certified by the Inspector Auditor of the Board. ii) In the absence of unanimous panel through election from among the Musallies of the Waqf/Waqf Institution conducted under the control and supervision of Inspector of Auditor of the Board.” 10. A perusal of the record would indicate that there are disputed facts to be resolved in this writ petition with regard to financial irregularities committed by the petitioners. An FIR was also registered against the petitioners. Unless a proper enquiry is conducted, these disputed facts cannot be decided. Amidst these disputed facts, Regulation 5 of Regulations, 2009 will not come to rescue the petitioners nor can they ask for conducting elections. Conversely, when there are no allegations against the petitioners and there are two separate groups, elections have to be conducted as per the said regulation. Unless they get a clean chit in the alleged criminal cases, the petitioner cannot legally claim their right for appointment of a Managing Committee and request for conducting elections. 11. It is a settled principle of law that when there are disputed question of facts involved in a case, the High Court should not exercise its jurisdiction 9 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and further the availability of alternate efficacious remedy bars the writ jurisdiction, unless there the orders impugned are ultra vires and passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 12. 11. Adding to the above, section 83 (2) of the Waqf Act, 1995 provides for an alternative statutory remedy, which reads as thus: “(2) Any mutawalli person interested in a 2 [waqf] or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act, or rules made thereunder, may make an application within the time specified in this Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed, to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the 2 [waqf].” 13. In W.B. Wakf Board v. Anis Fatma Begum, (2010) 14 SCC 588, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held as follows: 7. The dispute in the present case relates to a wakf. In our opinion, all matters pertaining to wakfs should be filed in the first instance before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and should not be entertained by the civil court or by the High Court straightaway under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It may be mentioned that the Wakf Act, 1995 is a recent parliamentary statute which has constituted a Special Tribunal for deciding disputes relating to wakfs. The obvious purpose of constituting such a Tribunal was that a lot of cases relating to wakfs were being filed in the courts in India and they were occupying a lot of time of all the courts in the country which resulted in increase in pendency of cases in the courts. Hence, a Special Tribunal has been constituted for deciding such matters. 10. Thus, the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to a wakf or wakf property. The words “any dispute, question or other matters relating to a wakf or wakf property” are, in our opinion, words of very wide connotation. Any dispute, question or other matters whatsoever and in whatever manner which arises relating to a wakf or wakf property can be decided by the Wakf Tribunal. The word “wakf” has been defined in Section 3(r) of the Wakf Act, 1995 and hence once the property is found to be a wakf property as defined in Section 3(r), then any dispute, question or other matter relating to it should be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal. 10 11. Under Section 83(5) of the Wakf Act, 1995 the Tribunal has all powers of the civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, and hence it has also powers under Order 39 Rules 1, 2 and 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to grant temporary injunctions and enforce such injunctions. Hence, a full-fledged remedy is available to any party if there is any dispute, question or other matter relating to a wakf or wakf property. 12. We may further clarify that the party can approach the Wakf Tribunal, even if no order has been passed under the Act, against which he/she is aggrieved. It may be mentioned that Sections 83(1) and 84 of the Act do not confine the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal to the determination of the correctness or otherwise of an order passed under the Act. No doubt Section 83(2) refers to the orders passed under the Act, but, in our opinion, Sections 83(1) and 84 of the Act are independent provisions, and they do not require an order to be passed under the Act before invoking the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal. Hence, it cannot be said that a party can approach the Wakf Tribunal only against an order passed under the Act. In our opinion, even if no order has been passed under the Act, the party can approach the Wakf Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matters relating to a wakf or wakf property, as the plain language of Sections 83(1) and 84 indicates.” 14. The observations referred to supra make it evident that, all matters pertaining to wakfs should be filed in the first instance before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and should not be entertained by the civil court or by the High Court straightaway under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Further, it cannot be said that a party can approach the Wakf Tribunal only against an order passed under the Act. Even if no order has been passed under the Act, the party can approach the Wakf Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matters relating to a wakf or wakf property, as per the Sections 83(1) and 84. 15. In view of the above, more particularly for the reason that complicated and disputed questions of facts are involved in these writ petitions, which require letting in of evidence, both oral and documentary, instead of going into 11 merits of the matters, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition in the following terms: The petitioners are at liberty to approach the Waqf Tribunal for redressal of their grievance, if they so desire. There shall be no order as to costs. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 06.07.2026 BRS Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable