THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.24906 of 2011 Date:21st November, 2011 Between: Sri M.M.Shareef S/o.Late Moula Mohiuddin ..... Petitioner AND The A.P. State Wakf Board rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Haj House Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad & Anr. .....Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.24906 of 2011 ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed by M.M.Shareef seeking mandamus declaring the enquiry report, dated 03.08.2010, and the consequential proceeding bearing No.E1/02/2010, dated 24.04.2011, issued by the Chief Executive Officer, A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad-1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and contrary to the Wakf Regulations as well as CCCA Rules. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Senior Assistant on 22.05.1989 in the office of the A.P. State Wakf Board. He was posted as Inspector Auditor Wakf, Medak District on 06.12.2006. While he was working as Inspector Auditor Wakf, Medak District, the 1st respondent suspended him from service. Thereupon, he filed W.P.No.19047 of 2007 and obtained interim suspension of the proceeding, by order, dated 07.09.2007. He came to be reinstated in service pursuant to the interim order, dated 07.09.2007, passed in WPMP No.24479 of 2007. When he was transferred from Medak, he filed W.P.No.26322 of 2007 and obtained an order of status quo on 10.12.2007 vide WPMP No.34341 2007. In view of the status quo order, he continued in service as Inspector Auditor Wakf, Medak. The 1st respondent issued a notice, dated 29.12.2009 calling for explanation from the petitioner for non- service of notices to the encroachers. The petitioner submitted explanation on 05.01.2010. The A.P. State Wakf Board suspended the petitioner from service, by order, dated 16.01.2010, pending enquiry and appointed an enquiry officer, by proceeding, dated 30.01.2010. He challenged the suspension order by filing W.P.No.1255 of 2010. The said writ petition came to be disposed of on 22.03.2010 directing the A.P. State Wakf Board to complete the enquiry within four months. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been given proper opportunity during the enquiry. The further grievance of the petitioner is that Board has taken a decision to terminate his services even before receiving his explanation to the show-cause notice, dated 30.10.2010. Therefore, the order impugned in the Writ Petition is liable to be set aside. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, Sri Mir Masood Khan, learned Standing Counsel of A.P. State Wakf Board received notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material brought on record. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunity to represent his case before the enquiry officer. Therefore, the report submitted by the enquiry officer is in violation of principles of natural justice. A further submission has been made that the A.P. State Wakf Board resolved to terminate the services of the petitioner even before issuing show-cause notice. Learned counsel laid much emphasis on the proceedings of the 1st respondent, dated 24.04.2011. Relevant portion of the said proceeding, reads as hereunder: “The Enquiry Officer while issuing notice to the individual reiterated the directions of the Hon’ble High Court but the individual willfully absented himself from the enquiry. As such the Enquiry Officer concluded his enquiry and submitted his report, and the same was placed before the Board. The Board in Resolution No.558/2010, dated 14/15.09.2010 unanimously resolved as under: “It is unanimously resolved having gone through the enquiry report and conduct of the delinquent and his non co-operative behaviour during the conduct of enquiry, goes to show that he has no explanation to offer and deliberately evaded his appearance before the Enquiry Officer, he is admittedly and an acceptance of the charges. His conduct is reprehensible and unbecoming of a public servant. Hence, the Board after careful and due consideration order his termination of his service from A.P. State Wakf Board with immediate effect.”. 6. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents supports the order challenged in the Writ Petition. 7. I have gone through the proceeding, dated 24.04.2011. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 03.08.2010. The A.P. State Wakf Board passed resolution No.558/2010, dated 14/15.09.2010 to terminate the services of the petitioner. After the resolution, a show-cause notice came to be issued to the petitioner on 30.10.2010 and the petitioner submitted his explanation on 29.11.2010. The material brought on record clearly indicates that the Board pre-determined the case of the petitioner to terminate his services. Therefore, the order challenged in the Writ Petition cannot be sustained. With regard to not providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, the order is explicit that the enquiry officer has given sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and it is the petitioner, who failed to avail the same. Therefore, it is impermissible for the petitioner to contend that the enquiry report is in violation of principles of natural justice. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad-1st respondent to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the show-cause notice, dated 30.10.2010 and pass appropriate orders afresh within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:21st November, 2011. cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.24906 of 2011 Date:21st November, 2011