THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3979 OF 2010 March 10, 2010 Between: Mohd. Akhter, S/o.Md. Bin Abdullah ... Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Haj House Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad And another ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3979 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner is resident of Sangareddy. He is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 15.2.2010 of first respondent whereby and whereunder the term of second respondent was extended for a further period of two years from the date of the proceedings. Therefore, he filed the present writ petition seeking its invalidation. The case of petitioner is that second respondent committee constituted under Section 18 of the Wakf Act, 1995, on 15.2.2005 with President, Secretary, Treasurer and nine other members. The Masjid- e-Deendar Khan is a wakf, having considerable landed properties exceeding Acs.100.00. Second respondent is mismanaging the properties and the rents and other amounts collected are not being accounted for. Petitioner therefore gave complaints to first respondent on 03.12.2009 and 26.12.2009, in vain. He therefore filed W.P.No.1688 of 2010 seeking direction to first respondent to take subject wakf under its direct management, after expiry of term of second respondent committee on 31.12.2009. This Court disposed of the said writ petition on 02.2.2010 directing first respondent to consider representations made by petitioner and take necessary action within four weeks. In the mean while, second respondent made an application on 08.12.2009 seeking extension of their term. The same was forwarded to the Inspector of Wakfs, who submitted a report on 11.12.2009. After considering the same, first respondent issued impugned proceedings. Petitioner contends that when serious allegations are made against second respondent, extension of term without obeying orders of this Court in W.P.No.1688 of 2010 is illegal and arbitrary. At the stage of admission itself, second respondent filed counter affidavit denying various allegations made by petitioner. An endeavour is also made to highlight the works undertaken by second respondent committee with regard to protection of property, augmenting income from properties and proper management of wakf. This Court heard the Counsel for petitioner and the Counsel for respondents 1 and 2. The submission that the order of this Court in W.P.No.1688 of 2010 has not been followed is countered by the submission that a show cause notice is issued to second respondent on 16.2.2010 and the books of accounts and other registers have been summoned for enquiry. Be that as it is, indisputably impugned order is an order made under Wakf Act and fall within the category of ‘orders’ under Section 82 of Wakf Act. Any person aggrieved by any order made under Wakf Act or Rules made thereunder may approach the State Wakf Tribunal for redressal under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act whereunder all disputed questions of fact and any other matter can be agitated. I n M.Bikshapathi v Government of Andhra Pradesh[1], Syed Muneer v Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Waqf Board, Hyd[2] and Allauddin Charities and Zakath Wakf v Hameed Ali[3], this Court held that remedy provided under Section 83(2) of Wakf Act is an effective alternative remedy wherein all disputed questions of fact and any other matter can be agitated. Petitioner approached this Court without availing alternative remedy and, therefore, it is not proper to interfere at this stage. Accordingly, giving liberty to petitioner to approach Wakf Tribunal to make application within a week from today and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. ______________ March 10, 2010 (V.V.S. RAO, J) NOTE: Dispatch order copy in two days. (By order) YS [1] 1999 (6) ALD 270 (DB) [2] 2001(4) ALD 430 (DB) [3] 2002 (1) ALD 67 (DB)