THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.5017 of 2010 April 12, 2010 Between: Khaja Qutubuddin Ansari, S/o.Late Khaja Yousuf Ali Ansari … Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.5017 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner filed instant writ petition assailing the order F.No.13/B2/RR/M/02/Supply, dated 09.2.2010, whereby and whereunder second respondent–Towliat committee was constituted with respondents 3 to 7 as its members. Dargah Hazrat Khaja Syed Mohammed Gulam Rasool Naib Saheb Qibla Chisti Qalendar Mirzai situated at Burgupalli Village of Vikarabad Mandal in Ranga Reddy District, is a registered Wakf. It has endowed properties admeasuring Acs.111.00. It appears, in 1978, petitioner’s grandfather late Khaza Meeran Ansari was acting as Mutawalli under a Wakfnama. After his death, petitioner’s father was allegedly appointed as Mutawalli. His term expired by 31.1.2006. Thereafter petitioner submitted a representation on 26.2.2006 seeking recognition of succession as contemplated under Sections 42 and 37 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (the Act). Without considering the same, first respondent constituted a Managing committee of respondents 3 to 7. Questioning the said order dated 13.3.2006, petitioner filed W.P.No.5607 of 2006. By an order dated 18.9.2006, the same was disposed of giving liberty to petitioner to make a representation to the Special Officer of Wakf Board, who was directed to conduct enquiry within a period of four weeks thereafter. The Special Officer conducted enquiry and submitted a report on 29.2.2007 recommending rejection of petitioner’s claim for Mutawalliship. The rejection was communicated to petitioner under proceedings dated 06.6.2007. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed O.A.No.19 of 2007 before the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal. In the mean while, term of second respondent committee was extended for a further period of two years. After expiry of said period, now by impugned order, again the term is extended for further period of three years. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed. This Court heard the matter on 05.3.2010. The counsel for respondents 2 to 7 sought time for filing counter. Accordingly the matter was adjourned directing status quo as second respondent committee was already in office. Respondents 2 to 7 filed counter affidavit opposing the writ petition and also raising objection that in view of the effective alternate remedy and a decision of this Court in Allauddin Charities and Zakath Wakf v Hameed Ali[1], the writ petition would not lie. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner and the counsel for respondents. Admittedly the petitioner’s claim for Mutawalliship was rejected. Against the same, petitioner preferred O.A.No.19 of 2007, which is pending. Therefore nothing prevents the petitioner to challenge the order impugned in this writ petition before the same Tribunal raising all the grounds. This Court in M.Bikshapathi v Government of Andhra Pradesh[2], Syed Muneer v Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Waqf Board, Hyd[3] a n d Allauddin Charities (supra) has held that in view of effective alternate remedy available under Section 83(2) of the Act, writ petition cannot be straightaway entertained. A Division Bench of Madras High Court has also taken similar view. The Chief Justice Markandeya Katju (as his Lordship then was) in Salam Khan v Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Chennai[4] has considered this aspect and held that when an alternate remedy under Section 83 of the Wakf is available, straight away writ petition cannot be entertained in respect of a dispute relating to Wakf under certain circumstances. Learned Judge observed as follows. Thus, the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property. The words "any dispute, question or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property" are, in our opinion, words of very wide connotation. Any dispute, question or other matters whatsoever and in whatever manner which arises relating to a Wakf or Wakf property can be decided by the Wakf Tribunal. The word 'Wakf' has been defined in Section 3(r) of the Wakf Act, 1995 and hence once the property is found to be a Wakf property as defined in Section 3(r), then any dispute, question or other matter relating to it should be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal. It is not proper for this Court to straight away entertain writ petitions relating to a Wakf or Wakf property when there is a special Tribunal constituted for this purpose. … … No doubt, alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the filing of writ petitions, but at the same time it is well settled that writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and when there is an alternative remedy, ordinarily a party must resort to that remedy first before approaching this court. Entertaining writ petitions straight away without insisting that a party should first avail of the alternative remedy is an over liberal approach which has caused immense difficulties to the High Courts in the country because they have added to the huge arrears. The Courts have already become overburdened by this over liberal approach instead of following the settled legal principle that a writ petition should ordinarily be dismissed if there is an alternative remedy. The High Courts in India are already tottering and reeling under the burden of massive arrears which have flooded the dockets of the Court, and such kind of over liberal approach has only multiplied this problem manifold. If this approach is further continued a time will surly come when the High Courts will find it impossible to function. All this has happened because unfortunately some Courts have departed from well-settled legal principles. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Liberty is given to petitioner to prefer appropriate application before the State Wakf Tribunal. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case, the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) April 12, 2010 NOTE: Dispatch order copy by 21.4.2010. (By order). YS [1] 2002 (1) ALD 67 (DB) [2] 1999 (6) ALD 270 (DB) [3] 2001(4) ALD 430 (DB) [4] AIR 2005 Mad 241