Mohammed Aijaz vs P.Shiv Shankar
2025 Latest Caselaw 2605 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mohammed Aijaz vs P.Shiv Shankar on 27 February, 2025

     THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                            AND
           THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

                    WRIT APPEAL No.239 of 2025

JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul):

Sri Habeeb Jaffar Bin Hasan, learned counsel for the

appellant; Sri T. Venkatesh, learned counsel for respondent

No.1/writ petitioner; Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned

Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and

Sri Farhan Azam Khan, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana

State Waqf Board, for respondent Nos.5 and 6.

2. With the consent, finally heard.

3. The challenge is mounted to the order dated 01.10.2024

in W.P.No.26961 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ

petitioner, respondent No.1 herein, earlier for similar relief, filed

W.P.No.18488 of 2023, which was dismissed by order dated

14.08.2023. Thereafter, the writ petitioner filed another writ

petition i.e., W.P.No.26961 of 2024 and learned Single Judge,

without considering the fact that similar prayer was declined in

the previous writ petition, directed for consideration of

representation of the writ petitioner. After having failed in the

first round in W.P.No.18488 of 2023, no relief was due to the

petitioner before the learned Single Judge.

5. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner supported the

impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.

6. On a specific query from the Bench, learned counsel for

the writ petitioner, fairly admitted that the writ petitioner,

indeed, filed W.P.No.18488 of 2023 for similar relief which was

dismissed. Thus, there was no justification in passing the

impugned order by learned Single Judge. It appears that during

the course of hearing, it was not pointed out by learned counsel

for the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner's pervious writ

petition for similar relief was dismissed. The present appellant

was also not put to notice.

7. For these cumulative reasons, the impugned order dated

01.10.2024 of learned Single Judge cannot be permitted to stand

and is accordingly set aside.

8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed. No costs.

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also

stand closed.

___________________ SUJOY PAUL, ACJ

____________________ RENUKA YARA, J

Date: 27.02.2025 Myk/Tsr