THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25306 of 2010 Dated 07th October, 2010 Between: Smt. P. Ramulamma and others …Petitioners And The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Hyderabad. …Respondent Counsel for the petitioners: Mr. J. Prabhakar Counsel for respondent: Mr. Mir Masood Khan The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the proceedings/orders dated 29.06.2010 of the respondent. Ordinarily, the petitioners would have been relegated to the Forum provided under Section 54(4) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’) against the impugned orders. However, from a perusal of the impugned orders, I find a manifest illegality which they suffer from, namely, that though the petitioners are stated to have submitted their explanations on 15.03.2010 as evident from reference No.2 contained in the impugned orders, in paragraph 3 of the orders, it was mentioned that no explanation has been submitted. In my opinion this approach of the respondent shows complete non-application of mind on its part. Consideration of the explanation is an integral facet of the principles of natural justice apart from the statutory obligation being cast on the respondent under Section 54(3) of the Act. The failure of the respondent to consider the explanations vitiates the impugned orders. On this short ground, all the impugned orders are set aside. The matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration and passing a detailed order after considering the contents of the explanations submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.32331 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 07th October, 2010 GHN