THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.4763 of 2010 02.3.2010 Between Mohd. Hussain, S/o.Late Ruknuddin Ahmed … Petitioner AND The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Haj House Building, Nampally, Hyderabad And another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.4763 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of first respondent in proceedings No.25/B2/M/Hyd/2006/Z.1, dated 30.9.2009. By the said proceedings, first respondent regularised second respondent as Mutawalli of Sir Nizamath Jung Wakf. The petitioner’s grievance is that Section 63 of the Wakf Act 1995 does not empower the State Wakf Board to appoint/ regularise any person as Mutawalli without time limit. The subject Trust in question was notified in Andhra Pradesh Gazette No.17, dated 20.4.1979, at serial Nos.1 to 13. On 15.12.2005, first respondent appointed second respondent as Mutawalli of the Trust and now by impugned proceedings the appointment is regularised. The petitioner contends that second respondent is not elected by Board of Trustees nominated by the Wakif and, therefore, the appointment of non-Chairman itself is illegal as per the Wakf deed. These submissions throw up two questions with regard to interpretation of wakf deed and the power of State Wakf Board to pass the impugned order, in the background facts, which are themselves in dispute. It is settled that when the facts are in dispute ordinarily a writ would not lie. Further, it is also well settled that if the legislature enacted a self-contained code and provided for remedies, the High Court would not ordinarily interfere if statutory appeal is an effective remedy. There is no dispute that any person aggrieved by any order made under any Act or Rules made thereunder may approach the State Wakf Tribunal for redressal under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act (the Act). The order passed by the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83(7) of the Act is also made subject to a revision before the High Court under Section 83(9) of the Act. As held by this Court in M.Bikshapathi v Government of Andhra Pradesh[1] and Allauddin Charities and Zakath Wakf v Hameed Ali[2] any order or proceedings of wakf Board can be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83(2) of the Act and this Court is not inclined to go into factual controversy. Liberty is therefore reserved to petitioner to approach Wakf Tribunal and seek redressal. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) March 02, 2010. YS [1] 1999 (6) ALD 270 (DB) [2] 2002 (1) ALD 67 (DB)