Directs government to ensure a legally compliant appointment within four months, allowing the interim CEO, Shaik Liyakat Hussain, to continue in the meantime
Hyderabad: Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court dismissed a contempt petition filed against the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for the Telangana State Waqf Board. The judge further directed that the current CEO, Waqf Board, be removed as he does not possess the requisite qualifications.
The court was dealing with a petition filed by one Mohammed Akbar. The petitioner contended that the State government failed to comply with the court’s directive issued on February 28, 2024, in an earlier order which directed the government to appoint a full-time CEO within four months.
However, the petitioner complained that the post remained unfilled beyond the deadline. Instead, an Authorised Officer, a non-statutory position, was appointed to manage the board’s affairs, allegedly causing financial losses to valuable Waqf properties, the petitioner said.
During the hearing, Senior Counsel Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, representing the petitioner, argued that the government failed to comply with the court’s order, and the appointment of an Authorised Officer instead of a full-time CEO was a clear case of contempt.
He cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Girish Mittal v Parvati V Sundaram, emphasising that contempt petitions could be filed by any aggrieved party when general directions of the court were not followed.
He further contended that the appointment of Md Asadullah did not meet the eligibility criteria under Section 23 of the Waqf Act, 1995, as he was a Special Grade Deputy Collector, a rank below that of Deputy Secretary to the State Government.
On behalf of the Telangana State Waqf Board, Senior Counsel DV Seetharama Murthy argued that the government had complied with the order by appointing Md Asadullah as CEO through GO Rt.No. 1167, dated August 31, 2024, and that any delay was due to unavoidable administrative procedures.
He maintained that the government acted in good faith and had no intention of defying the court’s order. Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy Principal Secretary Minority Welfare Department, argued that the contempt petition was not maintainable as the petitioner was neither a party to the original writ petition nor an aggrieved person. Further, he argued that only a party to the original case or someone expressly granted permission by the court could initiate contempt proceedings.
After hearing all parties, the court observed that while contempt proceedings ensure compliance with judicial orders, they must be initiated by an aggrieved party. The court also found that the appointment of Md Asadullah was not in conformity with Section 23 of the Waqf Act, 1995, which mandates that the CEO must hold a rank not below that of a Deputy Secretary to the State Government.
Since Asadullah’s position as a Special Grade Deputy Collector fell below this requirement, the court ordered his removal with immediate effect. It directed the government to ensure a legally compliant appointment within four months, allowing the interim CEO, Shaik Liyakat Hussain, to continue in the meantime.
