IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 24702 of 2002 Between: Gunda Appa Rao & others. ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Panchayat Wing, Nalgonda District and others. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.R.PRABHAKAR Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2:None appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.3:S.M.SUBHANI. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 24702 of 2002 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in initiating proceedings under Section 54 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’) in respect of the properties at Sy.Nos.1 and 2 of Kodad, Nalgonda District, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and without any authority of law. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Heard Sri S.M.Subhani, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3 and perused the record. The petitioners felt aggrieved by the notices issued under Section 54(1) of the Act, whereby they were called upon to show cause why they shall not be evicted from the properties in their occupation as the properties were registered as the notiﬁed wakf property vide A.P. Gazette No.7.A dated 15-02-1990 at page No.97 and Sl.No.13908. Under Section 54(1) of the Act, whenever the Chief Executive Oﬃcer considers whether on receiving any complaint or on his own motion that there has been an encroachment on any land, building, space or other property, which is wakf property and, which has been registered as such under the Act, he shall issue a show cause notice. Under Sub-section (3), after considering the objections received from the persons in occupation and after conducting an enquiry, the Chief Executive Oﬃcer shall pass an order of eviction if he is satisfied that the property in question is the wakf property and that there has been an encroachment on the said property. Under Section 54(4), a person aggrieved by an order passed under sub-section (3) by the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, is entitled to institute a suit in a Tribunal to establish his right, title or interest in the land, building, space or other property. In view of the scheme of the Act contained in the above mentioned provisions, the writ petition ﬁled questioning the show-cause notice is wholly misconceived. The petitioners are entitled to submit their explanations to the show-cause notices within a period of four weeks from today and respondent No.3, Chief Executive Oﬃcer, shall pass an order thereafter considering the objections if any ﬁled. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the order that may be passed by him, they are entitled to avail the remedy under Section 54(4) of the Act. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.31093 of 2002 and WVMP.No.2068 of 2003 are dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dt:20-10-2008 usd