THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.17905 of 2006 26th March 2007 Between: 1. E.Neeleshwar, S/o.Late Lingamurthy, 54 years, R/o.8-5-10, Old Bowenpally, Secuncerabad. And nine others. …PETITIONERS AND 1. The A.P.State Wakf Board, rep.by its Secretary, Razzack Manzil, Public Garden Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. And three others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.17905 of 2006 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri T.Jagdish, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri M.A.Qureshi, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal. The petitioners filed this Writ Petition seeking to assail the order dated 16.03.2006 in L.G.C.No.214 of 1995 on the file of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad wherein, while dismissing an application filed by the applicants therein, the Special Court gave a finding to the effect that the property in question, which the petitioners claimed, is a Wakf property and therefore, such a finding comes against the parallel proceedings pending before the other Courts. The facts, in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this Writ Petition, are that the said L.G.C.No.214 of 1995 is filed by the totally different individuals, though they are not made parties to the present Writ Petition seeking eviction against the petitioners and several other persons. After contesting the same, the said application was dismissed holding that the petitioners and other respondents are not land grabbers. However, while considering on merits, it has been taken into consideration by the respondents there in that it is held that it is a Wakf property. Having regard to the nature of the question involved in the said L.G.C., which is filed by totally different persons, neither the Wakf Board nor any person on behalf of the Board filed any such application nor sought any such relief, which is not necessary for this Court to go into such course and give such finding. It is the only question to be considered where the petitioners and others are land grabbers or not, but not to give any findings in favour of any other parties or institution as such. Across the Bar, the counsel on either side stated that there have been decrees obtained sought to be executed only on the basis of findings in these proceedings. Therefore, it is this finding given in their way. It is needless to mention that there cannot be any stipulation of the proceedings which are pending in some other Courts against which the petitioners can as well avail appropriate remedies and obtain proper reliefs. However, the same cannot be dealt with in this Writ Petition, which is filed seeking dismissal of the L.G.C. only. Having heard the counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, we hold that the finding given in regard to the nature of property as Wakf is wholly unsustainable and cannot be made in use of by either of the parties, much less, against the petitioners herein in any other parallel proceedings. However, it is always open for the Wakf Board or any other person concerned to seek appropriate relief and necessary declaration to which they are entitled. We also make it clear that the petitioner is entitled to raise all the objections in the parallel proceedings, which are pending and the same should be considered and disposed of on merits without being influenced or effected by these proceedings and taking into consideration the finding given in the L.G.C. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) _________________________ (M.VENKATESWARA REDDY, J) 26th March 2007 RRB