IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 27527 of 2008 Between: Shaik Mohd.Hussain S/o.Sk.Madan Saheb Hyderabad Under Suspension, R/o.Vemuluripadu village Aminabad Post, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District ..... PETITIONER AND AP State Wakf Board, Razak Manzil, Opp:Public Gardens Nampally, Hyderabad, rep.by its Chief Executive Officer .....RESPONDENT 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 an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ (i) declaring the proceedings No.E2/55/2006 dated 27.11.2008 issued by the Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same (ii) declare the action of the respondent in not releasing the subsistence allowance due to the petitioner from January 2008 as illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.M.SUBHANI (SC FOR AP WAKF BOARD) The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the proceedings dated 27.11.2008 issued by the A.P.State Wakf Board ordering de novo enquiry into the charges framed against him in charge memo dated 2.7.2007. The petitioner is also seeking to declare the action of the respondent in not releasing the subsistence allowance due to him from January, 2008 as illegal and to direct the respondent to reinstate him into service with all consequential benefits. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel for the respondent Wakf Board and at their request the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. By proceedings dated 3.5.2006 the petitioner herein was placed under suspension for issuing No Objection Certificate, without any authority, in respect of land attached to Ashoorkhana, a notified and registered wakf to which the petitioner submitted his explanation. Thereafter the matter was placed before the Special Officer, Wakf Board for consideration and it was decided to conduct an enquiry into the matter. Pursuant thereto, an enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted on 29.4.2008. After going through the report, the Special Officer, found that the enquiry officer committed certain irregularities in giving the report and therefore, thought it appropriate to order for de novo enquiry by appointing a team of enquiry officers to conduct the enquiry into the charges framed against the petitioner, within a period of one month. The main grievance of the petitioner is that though he was placed under suspension, he was not being paid the subsistence allowance and, therefore, he should be reinstated into service forthwith. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned standing counsel for the Wakf Board placed before the Court the proceedings dated 12.12.2008 which read as under; “In the ref. 1st cited, subsistence allowance was not released due to non-availability of residential address of Sri Shaik Mohammed Hussain Ex.I.A.Prakasham (under suspension)’ In the ref. 2nd cited, the individual has furnished the residential address as Sri Shaik Mohammed Hussain S/o Shaik Madar Saheb, C/o Shaik Mohiddin, Vemulauripadu (v) Ameenabad (Post) Phirangipuram (M) Guntur District for further correspondence and requested to release substance allowance January, 2008. The charge memo and proceedings have been served to the individual under Registered post on the above address which was acknowledged by the same individual. The Accounts Officer is hereby authorized to release the pending subsistence allowance from January, 2008 to Shaik Mohammed Hussain, Ex.I.A. Prakasam (under suspension).” A reading of the above proceedings make it clear that subsistence allowance is now being released to the petitioner vide proceedings dated 12.12.2008. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that since the subsistence allowance was not being paid to him, he should be reinstated into service cannot be sustained. That apart, even while ordering de novo enquiry, the Special Officer has clearly directed the team of enquiry officers to complete the enquiry within one month. In the circumstances, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. N.V.RAMANA,J Dt.18.12.2008 msv