Wakf Act amended Act 2013 - An M.L.A. who was appointed as member of Wakf Board automatically ceases his office on termination of his M.L.A. Tenure - Writ basing on old F.B. judgment is not maintainable = Shaik Subhani.. Petitioner #The Government of Andhra Pradesh,Represented by its Principal Secretary,Minority Welfare Department, Hyderabad ... Respondents = Published in judis.nic.in/judis_andhra/filename=10517
Wakf Act amended Act 2013 - An M.L.A. who was appointed as member of Wakf Board automatically ceases his office on termination of his M.L.A. Tenure - Writ basing on old F.B. judgment is not maintainable =
This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of
respondent No.2-Wakf Board in orally refusing to let the petitioner to function
as its Member without any written order and preventing him from functioning as
such contrary to the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.23603/2010, dated 23-11-2012, as illegal and arbitrary.
The Full Bench, by its Judgment dated 23-11-2012, on interpretation
of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short "the Act") held that the
tenure of a Member of the Wakf Board is not co-terminus with the tenure of the
Member of a State Legislative Assembly or the Parliament or the Bar Council, as
the case may be. =
Parliament has amended the Act
under the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 (Act No.27 of 2013) introducing sweeping
changes to the Act and that as per the said Amendment Act, the provisions of
Section 14 of the Act have been amended by adding Explanation II to Section
14(1) thereof whereunder it is declared that a Muslim member who ceases to be a
Member of a State Legislative Assembly shall be deemed to have vacated the
office of the Member of the Wakf Board.
A perusal of the copy of the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 filed by the petitioner
shows that the same has been published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary)
No.37, on 23-9-2013. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the Wakf
(Amendment) Act 2013 has already come into effect. As a result of the coming
into force of the said Amendment Act, the petitioner cannot claim to continue as
a Member of respondent No.2-Wakf Board as he has admitted that he ceased to be
an M.L.A.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
W.P.No.31193 of 2013
7-11-2013
Shaik Subhani.. Petitioner
#The Government of Andhra Pradesh,Represented by its Principal
Secretary,Minority Welfare Department, Hyderabad ... Respondents
!Counsel for petitioner : Sri M. Janardhan Rao
^Counsel for respondent No.1 : Assistant Government Pleader
for Minority Welfare
Counsel for respondent No.2 : Sri Shafat Ahmed Khan,
Standing Counsel
<GIST:
>HEAD NOTE:
?CASES REFERRED :
Nil
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of
respondent No.2-Wakf Board in orally refusing to let the petitioner to function
as its Member without any written order and preventing him from functioning as
such contrary to the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.23603/2010, dated 23-11-2012, as illegal and arbitrary.
While the petitioner was a Member of A.P. State Legislative Assembly
(MLA), he was appointed as one of the Members of respondent No.2-Wakf Board.
One person by name Shaik Fareed filed W.P.No.23603/2010 questioning the action
of respondent No.2-Wakf Board in continuing the petitioner as its Member despite
expiry of his tenure as the M.L.A. The issue was referred to a Full Bench of
this Court. The Full Bench, by its Judgment dated 23-11-2012, on interpretation
of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short "the Act") held that the
tenure of a Member of the Wakf Board is not co-terminus with the tenure of the
Member of a State Legislative Assembly or the Parliament or the Bar Council, as
the case may be. The petitioner pleaded that the Parliament has amended the Act
under the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 (Act No.27 of 2013) introducing sweeping
changes to the Act and that as per the said Amendment Act, the provisions of
Section 14 of the Act have been amended by adding Explanation II to Section
14(1) thereof whereunder it is declared that a Muslim member who ceases to be a
Member of a State Legislative Assembly shall be deemed to have vacated the
office of the Member of the Wakf Board. It is however the plea of the learned
Counsel for the petitioner that the said Amendment Act has not been notified as
yet.
Sri Shafat Ahmed Khan, learned Counsel for respondent No.2-Wakf Board,
submitted that a copy of the Gazette of India, filed by the petitioner, itself
would negate the plea of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
A perusal of the copy of the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 filed by the petitioner
shows that the same has been published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary)
No.37, on 23-9-2013. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the Wakf
(Amendment) Act 2013 has already come into effect. As a result of the coming
into force of the said Amendment Act, the petitioner cannot claim to continue as
a Member of respondent No.2-Wakf Board as he has admitted that he ceased to be
an M.L.A.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.38745/2013 for
interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
________________________
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
07-11-2013
This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of
respondent No.2-Wakf Board in orally refusing to let the petitioner to function
as its Member without any written order and preventing him from functioning as
such contrary to the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.23603/2010, dated 23-11-2012, as illegal and arbitrary.
The Full Bench, by its Judgment dated 23-11-2012, on interpretation
of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short "the Act") held that the
tenure of a Member of the Wakf Board is not co-terminus with the tenure of the
Member of a State Legislative Assembly or the Parliament or the Bar Council, as
the case may be. =
Parliament has amended the Act
under the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 (Act No.27 of 2013) introducing sweeping
changes to the Act and that as per the said Amendment Act, the provisions of
Section 14 of the Act have been amended by adding Explanation II to Section
14(1) thereof whereunder it is declared that a Muslim member who ceases to be a
Member of a State Legislative Assembly shall be deemed to have vacated the
office of the Member of the Wakf Board.
A perusal of the copy of the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 filed by the petitioner
shows that the same has been published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary)
No.37, on 23-9-2013. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the Wakf
(Amendment) Act 2013 has already come into effect. As a result of the coming
into force of the said Amendment Act, the petitioner cannot claim to continue as
a Member of respondent No.2-Wakf Board as he has admitted that he ceased to be
an M.L.A.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
W.P.No.31193 of 2013
7-11-2013
Shaik Subhani.. Petitioner
#The Government of Andhra Pradesh,Represented by its Principal
Secretary,Minority Welfare Department, Hyderabad ... Respondents
!Counsel for petitioner : Sri M. Janardhan Rao
^Counsel for respondent No.1 : Assistant Government Pleader
for Minority Welfare
Counsel for respondent No.2 : Sri Shafat Ahmed Khan,
Standing Counsel
<GIST:
>HEAD NOTE:
?CASES REFERRED :
Nil
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of
respondent No.2-Wakf Board in orally refusing to let the petitioner to function
as its Member without any written order and preventing him from functioning as
such contrary to the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.23603/2010, dated 23-11-2012, as illegal and arbitrary.
While the petitioner was a Member of A.P. State Legislative Assembly
(MLA), he was appointed as one of the Members of respondent No.2-Wakf Board.
One person by name Shaik Fareed filed W.P.No.23603/2010 questioning the action
of respondent No.2-Wakf Board in continuing the petitioner as its Member despite
expiry of his tenure as the M.L.A. The issue was referred to a Full Bench of
this Court. The Full Bench, by its Judgment dated 23-11-2012, on interpretation
of the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 (for short "the Act") held that the
tenure of a Member of the Wakf Board is not co-terminus with the tenure of the
Member of a State Legislative Assembly or the Parliament or the Bar Council, as
the case may be. The petitioner pleaded that the Parliament has amended the Act
under the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 (Act No.27 of 2013) introducing sweeping
changes to the Act and that as per the said Amendment Act, the provisions of
Section 14 of the Act have been amended by adding Explanation II to Section
14(1) thereof whereunder it is declared that a Muslim member who ceases to be a
Member of a State Legislative Assembly shall be deemed to have vacated the
office of the Member of the Wakf Board. It is however the plea of the learned
Counsel for the petitioner that the said Amendment Act has not been notified as
yet.
Sri Shafat Ahmed Khan, learned Counsel for respondent No.2-Wakf Board,
submitted that a copy of the Gazette of India, filed by the petitioner, itself
would negate the plea of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
A perusal of the copy of the Wakf (Amendment) Act 2013 filed by the petitioner
shows that the same has been published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary)
No.37, on 23-9-2013. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that the Wakf
(Amendment) Act 2013 has already come into effect. As a result of the coming
into force of the said Amendment Act, the petitioner cannot claim to continue as
a Member of respondent No.2-Wakf Board as he has admitted that he ceased to be
an M.L.A.
For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.38745/2013 for
interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
________________________
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
07-11-2013
Comments
Post a Comment