IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23324 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Saleem S/o. Syed Abbas Chout Uppal (M) Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Secretary to Government, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Minorities Welfare (Wak-1) Department Secretariat , Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Executive Officer, A.P. Wakf Board Razzak Manzil, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Inspector Auditor Wakf Board Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents in the not considering the application dt. 18-3-2006 and subsequently application dt. 6-10-2008 to issuing of No Objection for contraction of Toilets, Visitors Room, store Room and House attached to beside the Dargh Hazarth Syed Abbas as illegal, arbitrary, contrary and consequently direct the respondents consider the application made on 18-3-2006 subsequent application dt. 6-10-2008 and pass such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.R.MOHD.IRFAN Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP for Social Welfare Counsel for the Respondents.2&3: MR.S.M.SUBHANI (SC FOR AP WAKF BOARD) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the Mutawalli of Hzt Syed Abbas Lakkaram. He ﬁled this writ petition stating that he made a representation on 18.3.2006 to the 2nd respondent – Chief Executive Oﬃcer, A.P.Wakf Board seeking no objection for construction of store room, toilets, rooms and a house beside the Dargah, at his own cost and the same is forwarded to the 1st respondent – Additional Secretary to Government by proceedings dated 13.4.2006. Thereafter, the 2 nd respondent by memo dated 4.10.2008 directed him to furnish all the details through the 3rd respondent – Inspector Auditor and on 6.10.2008 he submitted all the particulars along with documents, plan and no objection certiﬁcate of electricity permission and required documents. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he submitted all the particulars on 6.10.2008, so far, no action has been taken by respondents 2 and 3 on his representation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare and the learned standing counsel for the wakf board. Pursuant to the memo dated 4.10.2008 directing the petitioner to submit all the details with regard to the constructions he want to make beside the Dargah, it is stated that the petitioner submitted all the relevant documents only on 6.10.2008. In response to the application submitted by the petitioner only, the respondents have issued the memo dated 4.10.2008 seeking further information. Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondents are not going to consider the representation of the petitioner for issuance of no objection for raising the constructions. I hope and trust that the respondents will consider the representation of the petitioner after taking into consideration the material submitted by him and will pass appropriate orders expeditiously. The writ petition is premature and it is accordingly dismissed. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.24.10.2008 msv