THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.5558 of 2011 (Dated: 15-06-2011) Between: Mohd. Viqaruddin Alhasnath Colony, Toli Chowki, Hyderabad. …Petitioner A n d The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board and Another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.5558 of 2011 ORDER: The writ petitioner questions the proceedings issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board with regard to constitution of the managing committee for Jamia Masjid Hazrath Syedna Abu Bakar Siddique (hereinafter referred to as `the Masjid’). 2. The petitioner claims to be a regular Mussalli and voter of the Masjid. According to him, he is one of the founder executive member of the Masjid. The grievance of the petitioner is that the managing committee of the Masjid as constituted by the Chief Executive Officer in proceedings dated 4.3.2011(No.45/Hyderabad/C/2008/Z-1) is not in accordance with the D A S TO O R or the Andhra Pradesh Wakfs Managing Committee(constitutions, functions and duties) Regulations, 2009 (for short, “regulations”) framed by the Government with regard to the appointment of managing committee, pursuant to the direction given by the Division Bench of this Court in Intezami Committee Mazid-E-Osmania v. A.P.State Wakf Board[1]. 3. In view of the order proposed to be passed, it is not necessary to detail the pleadings of the parties placed on record. 4. The primary issue that calls for adjudication in this writ petition is whether the petitioner can invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without approaching the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995? 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that constitution of the managing committee of the Masjid is not in accordance with the DASTOOR or in accordance with the regulations, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In support of his submissions, reliance has been placed on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Intezami Committee Mazid-E-Osmania v. A.P.State Wakf Board ( 1 supra). 7. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that the petitioner has a remedy before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Wakf Act and therefore, invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not warranted. In support of his submissions, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Board of Wakf, West Bengal vs. Anis Fatma Begum[2]. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent adopted the arguments advanced by the 1st respondent. 9. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The petitioner in para (9) of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition stated as hereunder:- “9. I submit that even though there is an alternate remedy to approach the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995, I am filing this Writ Petition on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and also violation of recognized and notified DASTOOR and provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995. Therefore, this Hon’ble Court is having ample power on the ground of illegality and lack of jurisdiction and ample power to entertain this Writ Petition by interdicting the impugned proceedings issued by the 1st Respondent Board on /3/2011”. 10. The petitioner is conscious of his having statutory remedy by way of approaching the Wakf Tribunal as contemplated under Section 83 of the Wakf Act,1995. The Supreme Court in Anis Fatma Begum (2nd supra) has observed that the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property. Indeed the Supreme Court extracted Section83(1) of the Wakf Act,1995 and observed as hereunder:- “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® of the Wakf Act, 1995 and hence once the property as defined in Section 3®, then any dispute, question or other matter relating to it should be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal”. 11. In view of the settled position of law, I am of the view that the petitioner has to work out his remedy before the Wakf Tribunal. Invocation of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the given facts and circumstances is unwarranted. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy by approaching the Wakf Tribunal as contemplated under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995. No costs. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.15-06-2011 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.5558 of 2011 (Dated: 15-06-2011) [1] 1996(2) ALD 661(D.B) [2] 2011(1) ALD 61 (SC)