HC tells Wakf Board to clarify on Hafeezpet land
Separate petitions have been filed challenging Board’s gazette
Telangana High Court on Tuesday asked Telangana Wakf Board to clarify its stand on 47 acres of land in survey number 80 of Hafeezpet village, which came into limelight following alleged kidnap of Katikaneni Praveen Rao and his brother by former AP minister Bhuma Akhila Priya and her henchmen.
Praveen Rao claimed that he, along with others, had obtained the land under a registered settlement deed. But the proceedings dated 16-06-2020 of Telangana State Wakf Board addressed to sub-registrar, Moosapaet, Ranga Reddy district, claimed that the property belong to the Wakf Board. The board asked the sub-registrar not to entertain any transactions, such as sale, purchase, mortgage or transfer, of the said property. Aggrieved over this, Praveen Rao and others have approached the High Court seeking suspension of the proceedings.
The Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and
Justice T. Vinod Kumar adjourned the case to Wednesday, giving Wakf Board the last chance to support its contention that the land belongs to the board.
Praveen Kumar, Pardhasarathi (also known as Goldstone Prasad), and others have filed separate petitions before the High Court challenging the gazette issued by Wakf
Board, notifying that the said lands belong to it.
Abu Akram, counsel for the Wakf Board, submitted to the court that the dargah of Hazrath Salar-E-Auliya (Rh) has an attached wakf land measuring acres 140-00 guntas in survey number 80 of Hafeezpet village. The Wakfnama was originally created by Muneerunnisa Begum, daughter of Nawab
Mohd. Hafeezuddin Khan Bahadur Zafar Jung Shams-ud-Dowla Shams-ulMulk, which was executed by her on 01-011955. With that, Wakf Board issued Munthakhab on 13-122013 under section 36 of the Wakf Act 1995 in the statutory Telangana Book of Endowments.
The petitioners have, however, contended that there is no signature on Wakfnama by Muneerunnisa Begum. The Wakf Board, however, maintains that due to some injuries to her, she was unable to sign the Wakfnama.
Following this, the High Court posed a series of questions to Wakf Board as to how it came to know that she was the owner of said property in survey number 80 and why the board did not register the lands till
2013, when she had been given the Wakfnama in
1955.
The court also asked if anybody gave Wakfnama of any property like Charminar, Golkonda, and other buildings, whether the Wakf Board would automatically register the property without examining authenticity the documents.
of