IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 8661 of 2000 Between: Khazi Ziauddin Siddiqui, S/o Late Khazi Mohd Jami Siddiqui, R/o Tandur , R.R.district. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P., Rep by its Pricipal Secretary, Miniorities Welfare (Wakf.II) Department, Scretariat, Hyderabad. 2 District Collecter, R.R.District, Khaiaatbad, Hyderabad. 3 A.P.,State Wakf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 Moulana Mohd. Shabbir Ahmed, S/o M.A.Gaffor, C/o District Collecter, R.R.District. (dismissed for defualt as per court order dt 8/9/03) .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ and declare that the action of the 1st Respondent contained in G.O.Ms.No.71, Minorities Welfare (Wakf.II) department dt 2-5-2000 purpoting to appiont the 4th Respondent as Khazi for Tandur Area in R.R.Disrict, is arbitrary and illegal and consequently set aside the same and direct the 1st Respondent to appiont the petitioner as Khazi by following the provisions o f Khazis Act 1880 for Tandur Qazzath constiting of R.R.District and Mahabubnagar District and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.M.QURESHI The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VEENA} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.8661 of 2000 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed challenging the appointment of the 4th respondent as Khazi for Tandur Area in Ranga Reddy District, pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.71, Minorities Welfare (Wakf.II) Department, dated 02-05-2000. The said G.O. is challenged in the present writ petition. However, it is recorded by the office that the present writ petition was dismissed for default against the 4th respondent by this Court’s order dated 08-09-2003 and as such the lis does not any more survive to adjudicate. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. ________________ 05-12-2008 kvr