IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 12814 of 2007 Between: Shaik Ghouse Basha, S/o.Shaik Silar, R/o.Mosque Street, Sullurpeta Town, Nellore Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Executive Officer and Ex-Officio Secretary, A.P State Walkf Board, Opp.to Public Gardens, Haz House, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Station House Officer, Sullurpeta, Nelloe Dist. 3 V.Ghulam Dastagir, S/o.Late Varusai Ghani, rep. himself as President, Managing Committee of Hzt. Nagoor Khadarvalli Janda Ground,Sullurpet Town, R/o.Sullurpeta, Nellore Dist. .....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 writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent herein in not enquiring into my complaint dt.15-6- 2007 filed against the 3rd respondent herein and not initiating appropriate action against the 3rd respondent herein highly illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to forthwith enquire into my complaint dt.15-6-2007 and initiate appropriate action agianst the 3rd respondent herein, and to grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRS.S.NANDA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : Oral order: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “declaring the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent herein in not enquiring into my complaint dt. 15-6-2007 filed against the 3rd respondent herein and not initiating appropriate action against the 3rd respondent herein as highly illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to forthwith enquire into my complaint dated 15-6-2007 and initiate appropriate action against the 3rd respondent herein, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” The petitioner claims to be the lineal descendant and the managing trustee of Hazrath Nagoor Khader Vali Janda Ground of Sullurpeta, Nellore District. By proceedings dated 1-6-2005 the 1st respondent constituted a Managing Committee for the Darga, alleged by the petitioner to be contrary to the provisions of Section 18 of the Wakf Act, 1995, despite the subject property not being a notified wakf property. The petitioner thereupon filed W.P.No.15668 of 2005 assailing the order of the 1st respondent dated 1-6-2005 constituting a Managing committee. By an interim order dated 28-9-2005, this Court granted interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the 1st respondent’s order dated 1-6-2005 in W.P.No.15668 of 2005. Alleging interference by the respondents l and 3 herein who are arrayed as respondents 1 and 2 in W.P.No.15668 of 2005 and seeking injunction against the said respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s performance of rituals at the Urs scheduled on 6-7-2007, the petitioner filed W.P.M.P.No. 16584 of 2007 in the above writ petition. By an interim order of this Court dated 28-6-2007 the interim injunction was issued as prayed for in W.P.M.P.No. 16584 of 2007. Alleging that during the conduct of the Urs on 6-7-2007 and thereafter the 3rd respondent was interfering with the petitioner’s function and at the instance of the 3rd respondent and two others, certain persons had prevented the conduct of the Urs and had threatened to kill the petitioner, a complaint dated 15-6- 2007 was presented to the 2nd respondent. Alleging that the 2nd respondent failed to act on his complaint, the writ petition is filed seeking the relief already adverted to. If the petitioner is aggrieved that the 2nd respondent has not registered the information disclosing commission of a cognizable offence, under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has a plenitude of remedies either by way of representing to the Superintendent of Police of the District concerned or by preferring a private complaint. In view of the interim orders dated 28-9-2005 and 28-6-2007 in W.P.No.15668 of 2005, the petitioner could lawfully resist any interference by the 3rd respondent. In view of the availability of alternative remedies under Section 154, 190 and 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this court is not inclined to adjudicate upon the grievance presented in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies available under law. ______________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 3rd April, 2008 GRR To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies