IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 14634 of 2008 Between: 1 Syed Abdul Kareem S/o.Syed Abdul Hameed R/o.H.No.22-2-749/A,Noorkhan Bazar Hyderabad 2 Mohd.Sikandar Ali Khan S/o.Late Rasheed Ali Khan R/o.22-7-692 Noorkhan Bazar,Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The AP State Wakf Board, rep.by its Chief Executive Officer, Hajji House Complex, Opp:Public Garden, Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Project Officer.Incharge Task Force,AP State Wakf Board, Haj House complex,Op:Public Garden,Hyderabad 3 Sir Mohd.Azmath Ullah ,Inspector Auditor Wakf, Circle I AP State Wakf Board,Haj House Complex, Opp:Public Garden, Hyderabad .....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 to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in nature of mandamus declaring the office order passed by the 1st respondent bearing Order No.112/HYD/K/2003/Zone-I dated 9.6.2008 directing the 2nd respondent to conduct of election with the assistance of the 3rd respondent for the purpose of Constituting Managing Committe Masjid Abdul NabiShah Saheb, Noorkhan Bazar,Hyderabad has illegal,arbitrary, capricious Malafide contrary to theprovisions of the Wakf Act 1995 and the ratio of the judgement reported in 2007(3)ALD page 711 and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: MRSYED SHAREEF AHMED Counsel for the Respondents: (SC FOR WAKF BOARD)ABDUL NAJEEB KHAN The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14634 of 2008 ORDER: The two petitioners are persons interested in Masjid Abdul Nabi Shah Saheb, Noorkhan Bazar, Hyderabad. Aggrieved by notice, dated 09.06.2008, issued by first respondent, they filed instant writ petition inter alia they contend that having regard to the provisions of Sections 18, 109 and 110 of the Wakf Act, 1995, and also by the decision of this Court in Syed Munavvaruddin Quadri v Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board[1], election cannot be conducted for the purpose of electing Managing Committee for Wakf. Learned standing counsel for Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board does not dispute the legal position. Indeed, in Syed Munavvaruddin Quadri (supra), this Court laid down as under. Section 109 of the Act is Rule making power of the State Government. Section 109(2) inter alia empowers the State Government to make Rules providing for the manner of election of members of the Wakf Board by means of a single transferable Board under Section 14(2) of the Act. As noticed supra in exercise of such power the State has enacted the Election Rules. Section 109 of the Act does not contain any provision empowering the State Government to make Rules for election of members of Managing Committee for being appointed under Section 18 of the Act read with Rule 10 of A.P.Rules. Even insofar as regulation making power is concerned, it is no difference. Section 110 of the Act empowers the Wakf Board to make Regulations with the previous sanction of the State Government. Such Regulations however cannot be inconsistent with the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder. Sub-section (2) of Section 110 of the Act enumerates as many as twelve matters in respect of which the Wakf Board may make Regulations. The “conduct of election of members of Managing Committee’ is very conspicuous by its absence in Section 110(2) of the Act. This would also lend support that the Parliament did not contemplate the election of a Managing Committee of a Wakf. Learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board does not dispute the legal position. Therefore, the decision of the first respondent to order election of Managing Committee of Jamia Mosque was itself without any authority or power. Learned standing counsel also brought to the notice of this Court, a memo F.No.93/L4(a)/WGL/06, dated 12.09.2008, wherein the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) passed the following order. In obedience of the orders of the Hon’ble High Court in the references 1st to 3rd cited and keeping in view the legal position, the AP State Wakf Board withdraw all the notifications issued to conduct Elections for constituting Managing Committee for Wakf Institutions through out the State of A.P. The Inspector Auditors are hereby directed withhold all such notifications and not to entertain any request for conduct of election in general and in the cases where the byelaws stipulates conduct of election the Musallians may be requested to make their own arrangement and give the elected list for approval. Wherever, it is found that the Mussallians have formed rival groups an spoiling the sanctity of the Wakf Institution, the Inspector Auditors shall immediately bring to the notice of the A.P.State Wakf Board to take the institution under direct management of the Wakf Board. In view of the directions of CEO, second respondent cannot conduct any election. However, the Mussallies of wakf may nominate a committee as indicated in the circular extracted hereinabove. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 03.12.2008 pln [1] 2007 (3) ALD 711