HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR C.R.P.No.4426 OF 2005 ORDER : The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, in Appeal No.1 of 2004 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad, dated 26.07.2005. The Ashoorkhana known as Peerla Chowdi is wakf property. One Katakamsetty Subbaiah was the muthawalli of the religious institute. He had no issue. He therefore took the assistance of Nagaiah who is the son of his brother Venkaiah. Subbaiah continued to be the muthawalli till his death. Nagaiah thereafter continued as the muthawalli of the institute on the assumption that he was the nearest blood relative of the original muthawalli. Apparently there was no dispute regarding the muthawalliship of Nagaiah. Nagaiah died on 15.01.1981. As the petitioner happened to be the son of Nagaiah, the petitioner stepped into the shoes of Nagaiah as the muthawalli of the institute. While things stood thus, the A.P.State Wakf Board, which is the 2nd respondent herein passed orders on 18.05.2000 taking control of the religious institute on the ground that the original muthawalli by name Subbaiah and his successor Nagaiah who is the father of the revision petitioner, passed away. It became necessary for the petitioner to question the orders of the Wakf Board assuming direct control of Ashoorkhana. The petitioner along with the 1st respondent herein who is none other than the husband of the sister of the petitioner filed W.P.No.14605 of 2000 on the file of this Court, challenging the orders of the 2nd respondent, dated 18.05.2000 in assuming direct control of the institute. The High Court dismissed W.P.No.14605 of 2000 directing the parties to approach the Wakf Board availing the remedies provided by the Wakf Act. Consequently, Appeal No.6 of 2000 was filed by the petitioner and the 1st respondent jointly before the A.P.Wakf Tribunal challenging the orders of the Wakf Board dated 18.05.2000. On 18.02.2003, the Tribunal remanded the case in Appeal No.6 of 2000 to the Wakf Board for fresh consideration. The petitioner thereafter made a representation to the Wakf Board to appoint him as the muthawalli on the ground that he is the son of Nagaiah who assumed the duties of the muthawalli on the death of the original muthawalli by name Subbaiah. It may be recalled that the 1st respondent apparently did not make any representation before the Wakf Board. The Wakf Board consequently published the application of the petitioner in Varta News Paper calling for objections. Neither the 1st respondent nor any one else raised any objection to the appointment of the petitioner as muthawalli. Thereafter the Board passed a resolution that the petitioner be appointed as muthawalli for the institute. The petitioner also filed a legal heir certificate before the Board to judge the rights of the petitioner. Through orders dated 03.03.2004, the Wakf Board (the 2nd respondent) appointed the petitioner as the muthawalli of Ashoorkhana. Curiously, at that stage, the 1st respondent came up with a writ petition in W.P.No.8123 of 2004 questioning the appointment of the petitioner as the muthawalli. The High Court however dismissed the writ petition through orders dated 28.04.2004 directing the 1st respondent to approach the Wakf Tribunal. Consequently, the 1st respondent moved the Wakf Tribunal and filed Appeal No.1 of 2004. Through the impugned order, the Wakf Tribunal passed orders on 26.07.2005 directing the Wakf Board to consider the matter afresh after according opportunity to both sides. The petitioner then filed the present revision invoking Section 83(9) of the A.P.Wakf Act, 1995 questioning the orders of the Wakf Tribunal. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that reasonable opportunity was accorded not only to the 1st respondent but also to the general public at large through publication and that the 1st respondent therefore is not entitled for a fresh opportunity. He further contended that the petitioner obviously is the hereditary trustee as the son of Nagaiah and that the 1st respondent being the son-in-law of Nagaiah cannot have any claims over the Wakf property in question. I am afraid that these questions are not to be considered in this revision. These questions deserve to be considered by the Wakf Board. The Tribunal considered that the 1st respondent deserve to be accorded another opportunity before the Board takes a decision as to who shall be the muthawalli of religious institute in question. I, therefore, consider that this revision deserves to be dismissed upholding the orders of the learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal directing the Wakf Board to reconsider the issue afresh after according opportunity to the petitioner and to the 1st respondent as well as to any other contending parties. It may however be pointed out that ever since 15.01.1981 when Nagaiah, father of the petitioner passed away, the petitioner has been managing the religious institute as the muthawalli. During the pendency of the writ petitions and the appeals before the Tribunal, he continued to be the muthawalli by various interim orders. As on today, the petitioner continues to be muthawalli of the institute by virtue of the interim orders in this revision petition. I, therefore, agree with the contentions of Sri M.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner shall continue to be the muthawalli pending disposal of stay application by the Board. Accordingly, this revision is disposed of continuing the petitioner as muthawalli pending disposal of the proceedings by the Wakf Board on the strength of the impugned orders. As this is an old matter where the petitioner has been acting as muthawalli since nearly 30 years and where the writ petition was filed in 2000, I consider that it is a fit case where the Wakf Board shall dispose of this matter expeditiously. Accordingly, the Wakf Board is directed to dispose of the remanded matter within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The revision is accordingly disposed of without costs. ____________________ JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR 7th December 2010 PNV