THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR W.A.No.188 of 2010 Date of Judgment: 23-03-2011 Between: The A.P.Wakf Board, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer ..Appellant And 1.M/s Bhaghanagar Investments &Trading Pvt. Ltd. And others. ..Respondents The Court made the following Judgment: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR W.A.No.188 of 2010 Oral Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Heard Sri K.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned senior counsel for the appellant. This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.9378 of 2009 dated 31-12-2009 allowing the writ petition at the admission stage stating both the counsel agreed that the issue cropped up for consideration in the writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment in B.GOWRA REDDY (DECEASED BY L.RS.) V. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (AIR 2002 AP 313). On filing W.P.M.P.No.550 of 2010, learned standing counsel for the A.P. Wakf Board submitted that when the writ petition came up for hearing on 31-12-2009, his colleague represented the matter on his behalf and he did not agree that the issue on hand is squarely covered by the judgment cited above. Hence, necessary orders may be passed on merits. On filing WPMP the court made the following order: “However, today, after hearing elaborate submissions of the counsel the fact remains that the issue that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment in B.Gowra Reddy’s case as stated in the order passed in the writ petition.” Holding so the WPMP was dismissed. Aggrieved by the order passed in GOWRA REDDY’s case the Wakf Board as well as the Government filed W.A.Nos.745 of 2002 and batch where Ac.0.28 gts. of land is notified as wakf. While dismissing the Writ Appeals it was held as under: “…….The further findings of the learned single Judge that the documents produced by the Wakf Board i.e., revenue records do not support that the property belongs to Wakf Board are again findings recorded on the material adduced through the parties to the writ petition. However, the said finding cannot be conclusive and it is always open for the Wakf Board to substantiate about the dedication of the property to the wakf and that the property belongs to the institution. In view of the same, if the Wakf Board is having any other material which was not produced before the learned single Judge it is always open for it to produce the said record to substantiate its plea if any enquiry is conducted by the Competent Authority under Wakf Act, 1995. If any such material is produced by the Wakf Board, it is for the Wakf Commissioner/Survey Commissioner to decide the same after giving due opportunity to the petitioners and all parties likely to be affected. In view of the same, several other writ petitions, which were posted along with Writ Appeals, filed challenging different notifications published in the same gazette are deleted from the list, since each writ petition has to be decided on its own merits considering the facts of the case and in the said circumstances, the writ petitions are directed to be listed before the learned single Judge. Having regard to the same, the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge is set aside and writ petition is restored to its file and list the same along with batch before the learned single Judge hearing the matter. Parties are at liberty to move an application before the learned single Judge for appropriate interim order. The Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR,J. 23-03-2011 Murthy