IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19220 of 2008 Between: Syed Naseeruddin, S/o. Khamruddin, Minority Welfare and Development Society, Mahabubnagar, Registration No. 394/07, R/o. H.No. 4-2-16/7, Ramaiah ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Executive officer Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Officer, Wakf Complex, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.S.ABDULLAH Counsel for the Respondents: MR.S.M.SUBHANI (SC FOR AP WAKF BOARD) The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in considering the petitioner’s representation dated 02-05-2008 ﬁled under Sections 70 and 71 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short “the Act”) read with Rule 24 of the Andhra Pradesh Wakf Rules, 2000, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the record. The petitioner, who claims to be a person interested in the aﬀairs of the wakf properties situated in Mahaboobnagar town, felt aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in initiating appropriate action on the petition filed by him under Section 70 of the Act. A perusal of the record shows that after obtaining necessary information from the State Public Information Oﬃcer, the petitioner ﬁled a petition before respondent No.1 requesting him to inquire into the alleged misuse of funds by the persons in the Management of the Wakf Complex, Mahaboobnagar, in the years 1999-2002 and 2005- 2006 on 02-05-2008. With the grievance that the respondents have not taken any action so far, the petitioner ﬁled the present writ petition. Under Section 70 of the Act, on the application ﬁled by any person interested in a wakf to institute an inquiry relating to the administration of the wakf and if the Board is satisﬁed that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the aﬀairs of the wakf are being mismanaged, it shall take such action thereon as it thinks ﬁt. Section 71 of the Act deals with the manner of holding inquiry. It needs no emphasis that the persons in the management of the wakf properties being trustees, it is their sacred duty to safeguard the wakf properties and utilize the income derived therefrom for the purposes for which the wakf is created. If any person interested in the aﬀairs of the wakf makes a complaint into the aﬀairs of the wakf, it is the bounden duty of the wakf board authorities to cause inquiry into the alleged mismanagement or commissions and omissions on the part of the persons in the management to take appropriate action to safeguard the properties and interests of the wakf concerned. Therefore, there can be no justiﬁcation, whatsoever, for silence on the part of the respondents when the alleged misuse of funds of the wakf, in question, are brought to their notice. To this extent, the petitioner appears to be justiﬁed in expressing his grievance. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the direction to the respondents to initiate appropriate action on the petition ﬁled by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, and ensure that the funds and properties of the Wakf Complex, Mahaboobnagar are properly protected. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.25074 of 2008 ﬁled by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 5th September, 2008 vrn