D VENKATA KRISHNA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this group of seven writ petitions, the issue is whether the notification issued by Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board (the Wakf Board, for brevity) declaring certain lands as wakf properties is illegal and whether the allotment of those lands by the Government of Andhra Pradesh to Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) and further allotment by the latter to third party industries is not illegal. Three writ petitions, being W. P. Nos. 17192, 20614 and 20372 of 2007 challenge allotment of land and the remaining are filed for invalidation of the Wakf Board notification issued in 2006. The two questions need to be addressed without ignoring the fact that persons interested in the wakf have already filed suits before the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Tribunal (the Wakf Tribunal) under the Wakf Act, 1995 (the Wakf Act, for brevity) and are pending for trial. The battle line between the group opposing the wakf board's decision and the other group supporting it is very well drawn given the strategic location of the land involved in the Government facilitated land transaction. The submissions spread over four days covered wide ranging issues with reference to Islamic Law of Wakfs, jagir land tenures and inam tenures. The core issue, however, which was focussed upon by the rival counsel is the maintainability of the writ petitions in view of the provisions of the Wakf Act entrusting the jurisdiction to resolve all disputes regarding wakfs to a specially constituted Wakf Tribunal and the provisions in the Wakf Act which expressly bars the jurisdiction of civil Courts. It is axiomatic that a Parliamentary law or a state law; a constitutional amendment included - denying judicial review by the Supreme Court and High Courts would be ultra vires as contravening basic structure doctrine. This is, however, not to suggest that the Court exercising judicial review power can ignore well settled judicially evolved principles which curtail the power on the ground of non-reviewability or non-justiciability besides other limitations in exercise of power.

(2.) INTRODUCTION

(3.) The Wakf Board published another notification, A. P. Gazette No. 14, dated 06.04.2006, by way of addendum/errata to earlier notification (hereafter, errata notification) correcting columns 10, 11 and 12 of the Registration Form. As a result of this, the service inam lands attached to the Wakfs which were not notified were included in the list of wakfs. This land admeasuring Acs. 1654.32 guntas in various survey numbers of Manikonda village (hereafter called, subject land or Manikonda lands) is at the centre of the controversy. The Government claims that the Manikonda land was jagir land and after abolition of jagirs under the Hyderabad (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulations, 1358 Fasli (hereafter Jagir Regulations), the land was taken over by the Government duly paying commutation amount to the successors or legal heirs of mutawalli. They, therefore, would contend that the land vests in the Government and even as per the orders of the Nazim-e-Atiyat, there is no permanent dedication to the wakf property. In the absence of any permanent dedication, it cannot be treated as wakf property. The Government would also allege that the impugned errata notification was issued without conducting survey and without following the procedure contemplated under Sections 4 and 5 of the Wakf Act. The APIIC and its allottees toe the same line with slight variations which in a controversy like this are unavoidable.