IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWELTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 10583 of 2008 Between: Janab Sri. Syed Ahmad, S/o. late Syed Peer Basha, Yeguvapeta, Sidhout Village, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opposite to Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyd. 2 The Special Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board, Haj House, Opposite to Public Gardens, Nampally, Hyd. 3 The inspector Auditor Wakfs, Kadapa. 4 Sri. Shaik Saheb Peer, S/o. Sri Shaik Khader Mohiuddin R/o. H.No. 10-120, Bellary Road, Kadapa. 5 Sri Syed Mohammad Peer, s/o. Syed Saheb R/o. 8-882, Maruthi nagar, kadapa. .....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 issue a writ of Certiorari or any other order or direction to call for the records in F.No. B3 / 03/CUD/06/Z0IV on the file of the chief Executive Officer, A.P., State Wakf board, Hyderabad and quash the order of Suspension of Petitioner from the Office of the Muthavalli of Fathu Mosque, Sidhout Village, Kadapa District dated 11-4-2004 by declaring it as arbitrary, illegal and motivated and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.N.NARASIMHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: SHAFATH AHMED KHAN(SC FOR WAKF BOARD) The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the order dated 11.4.2008 passed by the 1st respondent-Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board suspending the petitioner from the office of the Muthawalli of Fathu Miyan Mosque, Sidhout village, Kadapa District, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner states that he was appointed as Muthawalli in the year 1995 and claims that since then he has been managing the affairs of the institution. In January, 2004, Sri Syed Mohammad Peer, the 5th respondent herein, is said to have made a complaint against the petitioner alleging misappropriation of funds and mismanagement of Wakf properties. The petitioner states that the 3rd respondent-Inspector, having conducted an enquiry into the complaint, submitted report dated 23.7.2004 to the effect that the petitioner has neither misappropriated any amount nor mismanaged the properties of the Wakf. In spite of this report, the 1st respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted his explanation dated 10.10.2007 denying the allegations. However, the petitioner states that the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 9.1.2008, placed him under suspension for a period of ten days and appointed an Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry into the allegations. Thereafter, based on a letter addressed by the 4th respondent, the 1st respondent again vide proceedings dated 11.4.2008 placed him under suspension indefinitely, from the office of Muthawalli. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent. A perusal of the impugned order dated 11.4.2008, passed by the 1st respondent, placing the petitioner under suspension indefinitely, would disclose that the same has been passed at the instance of the 4th respondent, who has nothing to do with the administration of the Wakf Board, which is a statutory body. However, both the learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained, and as such be set aside, with a direction to the 1st respondent to complete the enquiry expeditiously. The learned counsel for the petitioner expressed no objection to this. In view of the agreed stand taken by the parties, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 11.4.2008 passed by the 1st respondent, placing the petitioner under suspension is set aside. The 1st respondent is directed to complete the enquiry initiated against the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ______________ 12-06-2008 N.V.RAMANA, J Ksr/bcj