Telangana High Court
Syed Amjad Baba vs The State Of Telangana on 30 November, 2021
Bench: A.Abhishek Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 23034 of 2020
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned
Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent No. 1, Sri
Abu Akram, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3,
the Government Pleader for Home for respondent No. 4 and Sri
Syed Yasar Mamoon, the learned counsel for respondent No. 5.
In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the action of
the respondent No. 3 in issuing the proceedings No.
R3/06/RENT/HYD/2020-ZONE(1)B, dated 21.11.2020. By the
impugned proceedings, the respondent No. 3 has accorded tenancy
on rental basis in favour of respondent No. 5 in respect of shop
bearing No. 5-6-424, admeasuring 12 x 11 feet, situated within the
area of DARGAH-E-YOUSUFIAN, Nampally, Hyderabad for a period
of eleven (11) months from the date of the order, by fixing the
rental value at 10,000/- per month.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
originally, the petitioner was allotted the subject shop by the
respondent No. 3 on monthly rental basis at the rate of Rs.1,000/-
for a period of 11 months commencing from 12.07.2002 and after
expiry of the same, the tenancy continued from month to month
basis. When the respondent No. 5 tried to interfere with his
possession, the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S. No. 1432 of 2014
seeking perpetual injunction on the file of III Junior Civil Judge,
City Civil Court wherein, status quo order was granted in favour of
the petitioner. That at present, the suit is posted to 17.12.2020 for
cross-examination of P.W.1. In spite of pending the above
proceedings, the respondent No. 3 has issued the impugned
proceedings in favour of respondent No. 5 allotting the subject
shop in his favour, without following the provisions of the Wakf
Act, 1995 on putting the petitioner on notice.
It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
umpteen judgments that allotment of government property is akin
to distribution of largesse and the same cannot be
allotted/distributed otherwise than by following the procedure,
which is in consonance with provisions of Article 14. Essence and
core of Article 14 is Wednesbury principle, which ensures fairness
in State action. The Wakf Board is a statutory authority created
under the Act and is enjoined to preserve, protect and better utilise
wakf properties and therefore is enjoined a public duty. It cannot
act arbitrarily and deal with property of wakf as if it is a
proprietary owner of said property, having all rights of
disposition/alienation.
The principles laid down in Ramana Dayaram Shetty v.
International Airport Authority of India1 followed in Kasturi
Lal Lakshmi Reddy v. State of Jammu & Kashmir2; Centre for
Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India3; Manohar Lal
Sharma v. Principal Secy.4; Bharti Airtel Limited v. Union of
India5; Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Ltd.,6; Bharti Airtel
Ltd. V. Union of India7; Akhil Bharatiya Upbhokta Congress v.
State of Mahdya Pradesh8, cannot be ignored in the matter of
such allotment.
1 (1979) 3 SCC 489
2 (1980) 4 SCC 1
3 (2012) 3 SCC 1
4 (2014) 9 SCC 516
5 (2015) 12 SCC 1
6 (2018) 4 SCC 218
7 (2015) 12 SCC 1
8 (2011) 5 SCC 29: JT 2011 (4) SC 311)
The authorities should had put the shops for auction which
could had fetched much higher price instead of extending the lease
in favour of persons to their liking in an arbitrary manner.
Having regard to the above and considering the fact that the
extension period of tenancy granted in favour of respondent No. 5
expired in the month of October, 2021, the official respondents are
directed not to extend the tenancy further in favour of respondent
No.5 or any other party on the basis of any private negotiations,
Board Resolutions or orders of the Executive Officers of respondent
Nos. 2 and 3. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall put the shops for
allotment through public auction only. They shall fix the date for
notification of public auction of the shops for allotment in public
domain on the official website and publish the notification in two
widely circulated local newspapers, including one Urdu newspaper
and conduct the auction in open, transparent manner and shall
allot the shops to the highest bidder therein on such terms and
conditions as the Board may consider fit.
With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________
A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J
Date : 30.11.2021
Note : Issue CC forthwith.
B/o
tsr
