THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.19166 of 2011 (Dated : 11-07-2011) Between: Garikapati Venkat Rao and 52 others …Petitioners A n d A.P.Wakf Board , Razzak Manzil, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer and five others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.19166 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioners, who are 53 in number, assail the Proceedings No.15/Wakf/Kmm/2000 dated 10.6.2011 issued by the 2nd respondent-District Collector, Khammam. The said proceedings have been issued pursuant to the requisition of the Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board, Hyderabad, F.No.C3/Prot/KHM/49/792/Z-IV, dated 01.02.2011. 2. The petitioners claim to be purchasers of the property from the original owners and whereas it is the assertion of the 1st respondent that the lands in occupation of the petitioners are wakf lands. A notice dated 25.8.2007 came to be issued to the petitioners by the 1st respondent under Section 51 of the A.P.Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) calling upon them to show cause as to why necessary action for eviction from the unauthorized possession of the wakf property should not be made. The welfare association of the petitioners, namely, Mothi Nagar Welfare Association, Khammam submitted explanation-dated 31.10.2007. They also submitted representation dated 2.3.2008 to the 1st respondent stating that they purchased the house sites from pattadars. The text of the representation dated 02.3.2008 reads as hereunder:- “ We are purchased House sites from a private person and registered such plots as per revenue records last 25 years back. The government has been provided all facilities along with Bank Loans and Municipal Permissions to our Mothi Nagar area. At present above 120 families are residing here. But, recently, the State Wakf Board has raised an objection against our residential area is that the area is belongs to Wakf Property. So, we are requesting you to sir please look into this matter and justify our area people. For which act of kindness we shall be ever grateful to you sir. Thanking you sir” 3. The 1st respondent issued proceedings dated 01.02.2011 whereunder, requisition has been made to the Collector and District Magistrate to evict the petitioners from the wakf property bearing Sy.No.86, 88 & 90 comprising an extent of Ac.11.00 gts. situated at Khammam town belonging to Dargah HZT Sonde Shaheed (Rh), Khammam. Pursuant to the requisition, the Collector and District Magistrate, Khammam issued proceedings No.15/Wakf/Kmm/2000, dated 10.06.2011 invoking power under Section 52(1) of the Act. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioners that they have not been heard after submitting their explanation to the show-cause notice and copy of the proceedings of the Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board dated 01.2.2011 has also not been furnished. Indeed the petitioners made a representation-dated 16.6.2011 for furnishing a copy of the requisition made by the Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board to the District Collector, Khammam. Despite the said representation, no copy of the requisition has been furnished to them. 5. When the writ petition came up for admission on 8.7.2011 Sri Mir Masood Khan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for A.P.State Wakf Board received notice on behalf of the 1st respondent. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner submitted explanation to the show cause notice dated 25.3.2007 and thereafter, no enquiry has been conducted by the Chief Executive Officer-1st respondent and all of a sudden, the Chief Executive Officer issued a requisition to the District Collector to evict the petitioners from the houses in their occupation. He would also contend that the petitioners after coming to know of the requisition sent by the Chief Executive Officer, submitted letter dated 16.6.2011 requesting to furnish a copy of the said requisition. But the petitioners have not been furnished with the copy of the said requisition and thereby, the petitioners are deprived of the opportunity of challenging the said requisition before the competent authority. 8. Per contra; learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal, as provided under sub-section (4) of Section 52 of the Act and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed in limini. 9. It is no doubt true that under sub-section (4) of Section 52 of the Act, the petitioners have remedy by way of an appeal to the Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act. For better appreciation, I may refer sub-section (4) of Section 52, which reads as hereunder:- “52(4) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Collector under sub-section (2) may within a period of thirty days from the date of the service of the order, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal within whose jurisdiction the property is situate and the decision of the Tribunal on such appeal shall be final.” 10. Indisputably, the petitioners were not provided with any copy of the requisition sent by the 1st respondent-Chief Executive Officer to the District Collector. The said requisition is pursuant to the show-cause notice issued to the petitioners. The petitioners submitted explanation to the show-cause notice. The way in which the explanation submitted by the petitioners has been considered can only be known through the requisition sent by the 1st respondent. The petitioners had already made an application dated 16.06.2011 to furnish a copy of the requisition. Since the petitioners have got an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal, they are at liberty to avail the said remedy. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy of appeal as provided under the Act within a period of 30 days from today. The 1st respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the requisition dated 01.02.2011 within a week from today, as requested by the petitioner association in its letter dated 16.06.2011. There shall be status quo existing as on this day for a period of 30 days. In so far as regularization of possession, it is left open to the petitioners to agitate the matter in an appropriate Forum. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.11-07-2011 Note:- Issue CC in two days (B/o) RAR U R G E N T THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.19166 of 2011 (Dated : 11-07-2011)