Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Tuesday made it clear that the Wakf Board and the Telangana state had no right to lay its claim over a land parcel admeasuring 50 acres in Survey No. 80 at Hafeezpet village in Serilingampally Mandal.
The court made it clear that the land belonged to private parties — Katikaneni Praveen Rao and others — who were recently kidnapped by Bhuma Akhila Priya, in relation to the land dispute.
The division bench comprising Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice T. Vinod Kumar set aside the resolution, Muntakab, and the gazette notifying the land as a Wakf property as being illegal, arbitrary and against Wakf Act 1995. It also set aside the entries in the revenue record which were in favour of the government and directed the state government to subdivide the land in Survey No 80 as 80/A, 80/B. 80/C & 80/D in pursuance to the final decree.
The bench also directed the government to mutate the names of Praveen Kumar and others in the said land.
The High Court went on to impose punitive costs of Rs 50,000 payable to each of the petitioners in the three writ petitions by the state government and the Wakf Board and ordered them to not interfere in the peaceful possession of Praveen Kumar and others.
The bench has pronounced its judgement on Tuesday, which had reserved its order in a batch of petitions challenging the decision of the Waqf Board in notifying the 140 acres of land in survey number 80 at Hafeezpet as its property. Petitioners Sai Pawan Estates, P.S. Parthasarathy, Praveen Kumar and other individuals, sought directions to the authorities to not interfere with their possession of the subject land.
During the arguments, Wakf Board counsel had submitted that the dargah of Hazrath Salar-e-Auliya has an attached Wakf land measuring about 140 acres in the Survey No. 70 at Hafeezpet. The Wakfnama was originally created by Muneerunnisa Begum, and executed by her in 1955, counsel said, adding that the land belonged to the board.
State government counsel contended that the subject land belonged to the state. On the other hand, advocate Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, counsel for the petitioner, contended that there was no signature on the Wakfnama by Muneerunnisa Begum.
During the course of the hearing, the bench asked the Wakf Board as to why it did not register the lands over the last few decades when the Wakfnama was given in 1955. The bench then reserved its judgment.
