HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22904 of 2011 Date: 27.10.2011 Between: Anjuman Ahle Hadees Youth Welfare Association, Visakhapatnam, reptd by its President-Md.Asad ..... Petitioner AND: The Govt of A.P., reptd by its Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare Department, Hyderabad And eleven others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri E.V.V.S.Ravi Kumar Counsel for Respondent No.1: AGP for Social Welfare Counsel for Respondent No.2: AGP for Revenue Counsel for Respondent No.3: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the proceedings vide R.C.No.14/Wakf/VSP/UGSK/2011, dated 09.05.2011, of respondent No.2, whereby he has constituted the committee for the management and maintenance of respondent No.4. Even though, at the instance of the petitioner, respondent Nos.5 to 12 are impleaded, in the view of this Court, it is not necessary to issue notices to them. The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is two fold, namely that having appointed respondent No.11 as Member Convener in terms of G.O.Ms.No.162, dated 09.07.1989, respondent No.2 has authorized the Inspector Auditor, Wakf Board, Visakhapatnam, to arrange periodical meetings of the committee; and that respondent No.2 failed to fix the tenure of the committee. After hearing the learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Social Welfare and Revenue appearing for the respective respondents, I find merit in the above two grievances of the petitioner. G.O.Ms.No.162, dated 09.07.1989, provided that the Local Mandal Revenue Officer shall be appointed as Convener of the Committee. Accordingly, respondent No.2 has rightly appointed the Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Urban as Member Convener. However, respondent No.2 has authorized the Inspector Auditor, Wakf Board, Visakhapatnam, to arrange periodical meetings of the Committee. To this extent, the impugned proceeding of respondent No.2 cannot be sustained. As regards the second grievance of the petitioner namely that respondent No.2 has not fixed the tenure of the committee, I equally find merit therein. It is trite that no committee can be constituted without fixing its tenure. Respondent No.2 has stated in the impugned order that the tenure of the committee will be intimated later. He ought to have fixed the tenure of the committee while issuing the impugned proceeding. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of in the following terms:- (1) The part of the impugned order, dated 09.05.2011, which relates to authorizing the Inspector Auditor, Wakf Board, Visakhapatnam, to arrange periodical meetings of the committee is set aside; and (2) Respondent No.2 is directed to fix the tenure of the committee and notify the same in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.28005 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. _________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th October 2011 DR