WRIT PETITION 18515 of 2014 on 10 June 1987

ORDER:

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue writ order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from his land to the extent of Ac 0.26 cents in Sy.No.600, Gollapudi Grampanchayat Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Vijayawada, Krishna District without having any right and without following any law as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land extent of Ac 0.26 cents in Sy.No.600, Gollapudi Grampanchayat Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Vijayawada, Krishna District and to pass…”

2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land, without following due process of law.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for Waqf Board admitted that the petitioner is continuing the possession of subject land and the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders.

4. The petitioner is in lawful possession of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.26 cents in Sy.No.600 of Gollapudi Grampanchayat, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Vijayawada, Krishna District and constructed a thatched house. In fact the subject land belongs to 3[rd] Respondent which is a Waqf Institution. Initially the 3[rd] Respondent entered into a lease with one Anumolu Ravi Kumar and the said Anumolu Ravi Kumar deposited an amount of Rs.28,600/- on 10.06.1987 as directed by the Secretary of A.P. Waqf Board, Hyderabad and thus he acquired right of purchase over the above said property from the 2[nd] Respondent. Later the 3[rd]Respondent and the said Anumolu Ravi Kumar agreed to transfer the leasehold rights in favour of the Petitioner and as such the Petitioner has been in continuous possession of the schedule property as one of the tenant. The Petitioner has been paying rents to the 3[rd] respondent institution regularly without any fail.

5. While matter stood thus, the 3[rd] Respondent institution has filed O.S.No.1238/2011 on the file of I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada by contending that the Petitioner and some others without having any right over the land tried to encroach the suit schedule property by taking the advantage of petitioner’s residence in vicinity thereof. The said suit was decreed with an observation that the civil court has no jurisdiction to dispose of the matter and only the tribunal is having jurisdiction to decide the matter as the suit schedule property belongs to Waqf and is governed under the Waqf Act, 1995. Thus the attempt of the 3[rd] respondent to dispossess the Petitioner and others from the land has been failed.

6. After dismissal of the above suit, taking clue from the observations of the Court, the 3[rd] Respondent pressurized the 2[nd] Respondent due to which the staff of 2[nd] Respondent are coming to Petitioner’s place and directing the Petitioner to vacate the subject property. Hence the Writ Petition.

7. It is settled proposition of law that when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioner’s violating constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioner’s possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v.

M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.[1], when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed by the 2[nd] and 3[rd] Respondents by issuing any notices by way of summary proceedings, without following due process of law. In fact, the claim of the Respondents is that subject property is the Waqf Property. Once it is classified as Waqf property the Waqf Act, 1995 contemplates due procedure to be followed. As per Section 54(1) of the Act any encroachments were found against Waqf property, the same can be removed by the 2[nd] Respondent by initiating eviction proceedings U/s 54(3) of the Act before the Waqf Tribunal only. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by due process of law.

8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed.

______________________________________

JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

Dt: 20.01.2025 krk

WRIT PETITION NO: 18515 of 2014

20.01.2025

krk