IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 16496 of 2007 Between: Shadikhana Committee, rep. by its member Sayed Ali, S/o Sayed Abdul Rehman, aged 70 yrs., R/o D.No.20-70-C, Asifpapa Street, Chengalraopet, Visakhapatnam - 1. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.State Wakf Board, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Hyderabad. 2 The District Revenue Officer & District Wakf Officer, Visakhapatnam. 3 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Visakhapatnam. 4 Ahle Hadees Mosque, Kothapeta Burial Ground and Iddgah Committee, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide No.4/VSP/PL- SL/Wakf/04, dated 23.12.06 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set the same in so far as handing over the possession of the shopping complex which is under the control of the petitioner committee to the 4th respondent is concerned. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.S.N.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.16496 of 2007 ORDER: Shadikhana Committee, represented by Sayed Ali, Visakhapatnam, filed instant writ petition challenging proceedings of District Revenue Officer (DRO), second respondent herein, dated 23.12.2006, whereby and whereunder fourth respondent was advised to take possession of land admeasuring Acs.0.73 in T.S.No.183, Fort Ward, Block No.4, Visakhapatnam, for management of iddgah for the purpose of performing Idd-prayers. Petitioner seeks invalidation of impugned order and for a consequential direction. The fact of the matter which is not disputed may be noticed. A Shadikhana (marriage hall) with a commercial complex was constructed on the land admeasuring 2,000 square yards in T.S.No.183 allotted by District Collector, third respondent herein, in Visakhapatnam. Be it noted that, after proposal for construction of Shadikhana and sanction of funds by Government of Andhra Pradesh in accordance with guidelines in G.O.Rt.No.17, Minorities Welfare Department, dated 22.01.1999, the District Collector, by proceedings, dated 13.08.2003, constituted a committee of four local Muslims for “construction management and maintenance of Urdu Ghar cum Shadikhana” for a period of two years. The land allotted by District Collector forms part of the old office premises of District Education Officer in T.S.No.183 (hereafter called, DEO’s Office). This also included another extent of Acs.0.73. When the second respondent directed fourth respondent to take possession of the land admeasuring Acs.0.73, present writ petition is filed. This Court while ordering notice before admission on 02.08.2007 stayed the proceedings impugned in the writ petition. Fourth respondent filed an application for vacating stay along with counter affidavit. It is stated that petitioner committee was appointed for a period of two years in 2002 and the period expired in 2004. As the period is not extended, petitioner has no locus standi to file writ petition. Shadikhana got separate shopping complex and impugned proceedings are issued with regard to shopping complex constructed in the place, which is nothing to do with Shadikhana allocated to fourth respondent, which is not making any claim over shopping complex. For the purpose of performing Idd-prayers, income from shopping complex is necessary. The shopping complex was constructed as funds released by Government of Andhra Pradesh in Minorities Welfare Department, and therefore, it is competent for first respondent to appoint managing committee for shopping complex. Learned standing counsel has not filed counter affidavit but has produced file bearing File No.LA/12/VSP/4372/85. A perusal of the file and the documents filed by petitioner along with writ petition would reveal the following. Ahle Hadees Mosque, Kothapet Burial Ground and Iddgah Committee in T.S.No.1116/B is a notified Wakf situated at Sunnapuveedhi. A portion of this land was encroached by fishermen. The Government decided to regularise these encroachments by giving alternate land to Ahle Hadees Mosque. The District Collector, therefore, issued directions vide proceedings, dated 03.11.2004 to handover Acs.0.73 forming part of old DEO’s office of State Wakf after excluding an extent of 2,000 square yards for Shadikhana. The fourth respondent committee was appointed by proceedings, dated 04.02.2005 issued by first respondent. Therefore, DRO issued proceedings on 13.09.2006 directing fourth respondent to take over possession of vacant land in T.S.No.183 after excluding the land allotted to Shadikhana for Iddgah purpose. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Visakhapatnam (Urban) was requested to supply sketch of the land to fourth respondent. When the same was not complied with, it appears fourth respondent addressed letters on 18.08.2006 and 15.12.2006 in response to which impugned letter was issued directing petitioner committee to handover possession. Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board also addressed a letter, dated 13.07.2006 to DRO and District Wakf Officer to handover possession to fourth respondent, in response to which, the impugned order was issued. The grievance of petitioner is not with regard to handing over of land admeasuring Acs.0.73 in T.S.No.183, but their grievance is that the shopping complex allegedly forming part of Shadikhana cannot be handed over to fourth respondent and it should be entrusted to petitioner committee for managing same. The submission of petitioner committee cannot be accepted. A perusal of proceedings, dated 13.08.2003 whereunder four persons including the deponent of writ affidavit were constituted as ‘construction management and maintenance of Urdu Ghar cum Shadikhana’ while entrusting only Shadikhana and not the shopping complex. It is the case of fourth respondent that the shopping complex which was constructed on the land forming part of old DEO’s office falls within the land admeasuring Acs.0.73 which has been directed to be handed over to fourth respondent in lieu of Wakf property at Sunnapuveedhi/Chengalaraopet Ward in T.S.No.1116/B of Beach Road, Visakhapatnam. In the absence of any material before this Court that shopping complex is integral and inseparable part of Shadikhana, no inference can be drawn in favour of petitioner committee. Secondly, as rightly pointed out, petitioner committee was appointed for a period of two years and orders, if any, have not been placed before this Court extending the term. The petitioner also has not placed any proceedings of the Wakf Board or District Collector whereunder they claim exclusive privilege to maintain shopping complex, which admittedly falls within property directed to be transferred to fourth respondent in lieu of their land, which was regularised in favour of fishermen. The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed with costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) .12.2008 pln