IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY-THIRD OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT ::
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO CC.No.899 of 2009 Between :
Zaheer Ahmed Khan, S/o. Gulam Ali Khan, R/o. R.R. District …Petitioner/Petitioner Vs.
M.A. Gaffor, Chief Executive Officer, AP State Wakf Board, Haj House Building, Nampally, Hyderabad, and others …Respondents/Respondents Counsel for Petitioner/Petitioner : P. Gangiah Naidu, Senior Counsel.
Counsel for Respondents/Respondents : Sri Mir Masood Khan Standing counsel for A.P. Wakf Board.
The Court made the following : [order follows] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO CC.No.899 of 2009 JUDGMENT :
This Contempt Case is filed by petitioner alleging that 1st respondent, the Chief Executive Officer of the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Hyderabad had wilfully disobeyed the order dt.21.11.2008 passed by this Court in CRP.MP.No.6699 of 2008 in CRP.No.5057 of 2008.
2. By order dt.19.02.2005, the 1st respondent removed the petitioner from the service of Muthawali of Dargah Hazrath Koh-e-Moula-Ali of Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District. This was challenged by petitioner in A.S.No.1 of 2005 before the A.P.Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad. The Tribunal rejected the said appeal of the petitioner by order dt.16.6.2008.
3. Questioning the same, petitioner filed the above Revision filed under Sec.83 (9) of the Wakf Act, 1995. In the said Revision, he filed CRPMP.No.6699 of 2008 seeking suspension of the order dt.19.2.2005 passed by 1st respondent.
4. On 21.11.2008, in CRP.MP.No.6699 of 2008 in CRP.No.5057 of 2008, this Court granted interim suspension of the proceedings dt.19.02.2005 of 1st respondent, pending disposal of the CRP.
5. According to petitioner, notwithstanding the said order, 1st respondent did not permit him to discharge his duties as Mutawalli and perform the birth day ceremony of the Hazrat from 07-07-2009 to 10-07-2009 and his representations dt.16-12-2008, 04-02-2009 and 25-06- 2009 were ignored by 1st respondent. The petitioner contends that 1st respondent had wilfully disobeyed the order passed by this Court by not permitting him to perform his duties as Muthawalli, and therefore he should be punished for contempt of Court.
6 . No counter-affidavit is filed by 1st respondent denying these averments.
7 . Admittedly, this Court had suspended the proceedings dt.19.02.2005 terminating the services of the petitioner as Mutawali. As the 1st respondent has not filed any counter explaining why he did not take note of the orders passed by this Court and consequently reinstate the petitioner as Mutawalli of the above Dargah, the allegations of the petitioner stand unrebutted.
8 . Today, CRP.No.5057 of 2008 has also been allowed by a separate order and the order dt.19.2.2005 of 1st respondent terminating services of petitioner as Mutawalli of the said Dargah, has been set aside.
9. Be that as it may, it was incumbent on the part of 1st respondent to given effect to the order dt.21.11.2008 in CRP.MP.No.6699 of 2008 in CRP.No.5057 of 2008 and reinstate petitioner as Mutawalli, pending disposal of the CRP. He cannot ignore the order passed by this Court and continue to act as if petitioner was no longer a Mutawalli of the Dargah.
10. In this view of the matter, I am satisfied that there is wilful disobedience by 1st respondent of the order dt.21.11.2008 CRP.MP.No.6699 of 2008 in CRP.No.5057 of 2008.
1 1 . Therefore, the 1st respondent is held guilty of contempt of court and is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In default of payment of this fine, the 1st respondent shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Date: 23-01-2014 Ndr/*
L.R.Copy to be marked: NO
B/o.
Ndr/* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CC.No.899 of 2009 (Pre-Delivery judgment prepared by Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao) Date: 23-01-2014 Ndr/*