THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.17219 of 2010 Date:18th October, 2011 Between: 1.Masjid-e-Aqsa Faiz Committee, Railway New Colony, Visakhapatnam-16, rep. by its Secretary K.V.Jeelani & Anr. ….Petitioner and 1.The A.P.State Wakf Board, Hyderabad, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer & Ors. ….Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.17219 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by the Masjid-e-Aqsa Faiz Committee, represented by its Secretary K.V.Jeelani and another seeking mandamus declaring the action of the A.P.State Wakf Board, Hyderabad, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer-1st respondent, in issuing letter No.13/ZV/eii/VSP/2009, dated 22.05.2010 and consequential letter issued by the District Revenue Officer & District Wakf Officer, Visakhapatnam-2nd respondent vide Rc.No.5/Wakf/VSP/10, dated 09.06.2010 and the letter bearing Rc.No.5/Wakf/VSP/10, dated 25.06.2010 issued by the Inspector- Auditor, Wakf, Visakhapatnam-3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short, ‘the Act’) and the Rules framed thereunder. 2. The 1st petitioner is Masjid-e-Aqsa Faiz Committee, Visakhapatnam, and the 2nd petitioner is the Secretary of the said Committee. The tenure of the Committee has been expired and the 2nd petitioner has been discharging duties as Secretary of the 1st petitioner Committee. There were disputes between the old committee and the present committee of the institution. According to the writ petitioners, the old committee mismanaged the affairs of the institution and misappropriated several lakhs of rupees. The 1st respondent has not conducted the enquiry about the deeds of the old committee. The Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad-1st respondent issued a letter dated 22.05.2010 to the Inspector-Audit, Wakf, Visakhapatnam-3rd respondent to conduct election to the 1st petitioner Committee. According to the writ petitioners, the steps taken by the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct election of the managing committee of the institution is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Therefore, the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in proceeding with the process of conducting the elections to the managing committee of the 1st petitioner Institution is assailed in this Writ Petition. 3. Rule Nisi came to be issued on 20.07.2010. An interim order came to be granted on the even date in W.P.M.P.No.21696 of 2010. 4. One M.A.Shukoor Jeelani has filed WPMP No.24984 of 2011 to come on record as 4th respondent in the writ petition. The said WPMP came to be ordered on 18.08.2011 permitting the said M.A.Shukoor Jeelani to come on record as 4th respondent in the writ petition. 5. The 4th respondent filed WVMP No.3214 of 2011 to vacate the interim order granted in WPMP No.21696 of 2010. When the WVMP came up for hearing, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken-up for final disposal. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that constitution of the managing committee of the 1st petitioner institution is required to be in accordance with the provisions under Section 18 of the Act and any action of the respondents 1 to 3 in taking steps to constitute the committee in violation of the said provisions cannot be sustained. 8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that the Government framed the Regulations called as ‘the A.P. Wakfs Managing Committee (Constitutions, Functions and Duties) Regulations, 2009’, (for short, ‘the Regulations, 2009), for constituting the committees of the Wakf Institutions. The respondents 1 to 3 are proceeding with the constitution of the managing committee in accordance with the Regulations, 2009, in which case, the petitioners cannot have any grievance. 9. The Government framed the Regulations, 2009, in exercise of powers sunder Section 110 of the Act. Under Regulation 2(d) of the Regulations, 2009, management committee means - ‘committee established/approved by the Board, under Section 18 of the Act and in accordance with these regulations. It goes without saying that the Regulations, 2009, have been framed for constitution of the committee as contemplated under Section 18 of the Act. How the committees are to be constituted is contemplated under the Regulations. The steps taken by the respondents 1 to 3 for constitution of the committee to the 1st petitioner institution is in accordance with the above Regulations, 2009. Therefore, the action of the respondents 1 to 3 cannot be said to be contrary to the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder. 10. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed and the interim order granted on 20.07.2010 in WPMP No.21696 of 2010 stands vacated. No costs. ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:18th October, 2011. cs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.17219 of 2010 Date:18th October, 2011