ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) None appears for the appellant on call, though Mr. Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel is present for respondent No.3. We have also heard Mr. Parsa Ananth Nageswara Rao, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondents No. 2, 4 and 5.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 31.08.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.No.18281 of 2007 filed by the appellant as the writ petitioner.
3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition with the grievance that it had submitted representation before the State Wakf Board contending that land admeasuring Acs.510.35 guntas in Survey No.83 of Raidurg Village, Serilingampally Mandal in Ranga Reddy District (subject land) was a wakf property. The subject land was endowed to the appellant by one Nawab Ghazi Yar Jung Bahadur on
1
2
10.03.1958. Without any intimation to the appellant, respondent No.4 made a declaration that the subject land was a ceiling surplus land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (briefly the 'Land Ceiling Act' hereinafter). Thereafter, State Government had allotted the land to the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority and later to the Andhra Pradesh Infrastructure Industrial Corporation Limited.
4. Learned Single Judge took the view that whatever be the strength of the claim of the appellant, based on the Wakf Act, 1954, the Court cannot overlook statutory provisions under the Land Ceiling Act, more so, when considerable time had elapsed and third party rights created.
5. That apart, learned Single Judge was informed that right of the Andhra Pradesh Infrastructure Industrial Corporation Limited over the subject land was affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court against which a Special Leave Petition was moved before the Supreme Court. Therefore, learned Single Judge observed that appellant could get itself impleaded in the said proceedings before
3
the Supreme Court, further observing that rights of the parties would be governed by orders passed by the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition. Thereafter the writ petition was dismissed.
6. In the hearing today, Mr. Parsa Ananth Nageshwara Rao, learned Government Pleader appearing for Revenue has informed us that the appellant had got itself impleaded by way of I.A.No.3 of 2007 in Civil Appeal No.998 of 2007 before the Supreme Court.
7. That being the position, we are of the view that no live issue survives for adjudication in this writ appeal and the writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
______________________________________
C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J
12.10.2022
MRM