V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) MADRASA Ahle Sunnath Bahrul Uloom, represented by its President Sri Abdul majeed is the petitioner in this Writ Petition filed challenging the orders of first respondent being G. O. Ms. No. 44, Minorities welfare (Wakf. I) Department, dated 27-12-2003. The petitioner prays for a Writ of mandamus declaring the action of first respondent in issuing the Government Order directing second respondent, namely, district Collector, Visakhapatnam, to send an amount of Rs. 6. 63 crores (Rupees six crores sixty three lakhs only) lying with second respondent to third respondent, namely, District Collector, Hyderabad, for the purpose of acquiring the land adjacent to Haj house, Hyderabad, for parking, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of section 32, 39, 69 and 97 of Wakf Act, 1995 (for short, the Act ). According to the petitioner the decision of the Government is contrary to the spirit and object of the wakf known as Dargah Hazrath Syed Ali Ishaq madina Vali, Visakhapatnam (hereafter called, Dargah ). ( 2 ) THE petitioner is a registered society formed for the purpose of uplifting and providing education to the members of muslim community by establishing educational institutions and libraries. According to the petitioner considerable extent of land situated at Devada village in visakhapatnam District is a wakf land belonging to Dargah. It is an inam land. It was also issued a title deed No. 42 as per the provisions of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra area) lnams (Abolition and Conversion into ryotwari) Act, 1956. Mokhasadars misappropriated the property. Therefore, a suit being O. S. No. 16 of 1902 was filed on the file of the Court of District Judge, visakhapatnam. The same was decided in favour of the wakf. In the appeal being a. S. No. 55 of 1904 before the High Court judicature of Madras, the Government entered into compromise with Mokhasadars. As per the terms of the compromise, the income from the land has to be spent for upkeep of Dargah for conducting Moharram festival to the satisfaction of the Collector, visakhapatnam and a portion of the income has to be constituted into a charitable fund for charity and education of Muslims. As per the terms of the compromise, the income from the land has to be spent for upkeep of Dargah for conducting Moharram festival to the satisfaction of the Collector, visakhapatnam and a portion of the income has to be constituted into a charitable fund for charity and education of Muslims. It is further disclosed by petitioner that Wakf board filed O. S. No. 147 of 1967 on the file of subordinate Court, Visakhapatnam, claiming lands in Devada Village as the wakf properties and for cancellation of various leases/sub-leases in respect of the property and for recovery of possession. The suit was dismissed. The A. P. Wakf Board filed an appeal being A. S. No. 89 of 1976. A Division bench of this Court in A. P. Wakf Board v. S. Syed Ali Mulla allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial court. Aggrieved by the said judgment, mokhasadars filed appeal before the supreme Court. By judgment in Sayyed AH v. A. P. Wakf Board the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the petitioner contends that the property in devada Village and the amounts realized out of the property belong to Dargah and they cannot be utilized for the purpose of acquiring the land for parking near Haj house, in Hyderabad. ( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, sri Syed Shareef Ahmed, while narrating the facts as above, contends that under the provisions of the Act fourth respondent is not entitled to utilize the funds belonging to the wakf at Visakhapatnam for general purpose. He would urge that Wakf at Visakhapatnam, has not become defunct and therefore the funds cannot be diverted for other purpose. As per Section 32 (2) (e) (iii) of the Act surplus funds of a wakf can be utilized only for the purpose of wakf with similar aims and objects. He also relies on Haj Committee act, 2002 in support of the contention that the funds belonging to the wakf at visakhapatnam cannot be treated as part of state Haj Fund. As per Section 32 (2) (e) (iii) of the Act surplus funds of a wakf can be utilized only for the purpose of wakf with similar aims and objects. He also relies on Haj Committee act, 2002 in support of the contention that the funds belonging to the wakf at visakhapatnam cannot be treated as part of state Haj Fund. ( 4 ) LEARNED Standing Counsel for A. P. Wakf Board, Sri A. M. Qureshi, submits that the Dargah at Visakhapatnam is under direct control of the A. P. Wakf Board and that litigation in respect of the property of the said wakf was fought by A. P. Wakf Board and therefore, it is the duty of the Wakf Board to get compensation from the land which was subsequently alienated by the Government to various Public Sector Organizations. He submits that the A. P. Wakf Board has also realized an amount of Rs. 5 crores (Rupees five crores only), which has been kept in fixed Deposit in Union Bank of India and punjab National Bank and that the said amount is not being utilized for the purpose of acquiring the land near Haj house at hyderabad. He submits that under Sec. 3 (k) of the Act petitioner-Madrasa Ahle Sunnath bahrul Uloom is not a person interested and therefore Writ Petition is not maintainable. According to the learned counsel, under section 32 of the Act A. P. Wakf Board is repository of plenary powers and for the welfare of Muslims and all wakfs, the Wakf board can take appropriate action. Learned standing Counsel also placed reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in S. Abdul Razack v. Mandal Revenue officer, Kollur in support of the contention that the title to the wakf property vests in the board and therefore the A. P. Wakf Board alone is entitled to receive compensation for the wakf property. ( 5 ) LEARNED Assistant Government pleader for Social Welfare submits that the a. P. Wakf Board is taking care of the welfare of all Muslims in the State of Andhra pradesh in connection with their avowed wish to perform Haj and therefore even if the amount is utilized, it is only for the purpose of welfare of Muslims. Locus standi of the petitioner ( 6 ) SECTION 3 (k) of the Act defines person interested in the wakf in the following manner. Locus standi of the petitioner ( 6 ) SECTION 3 (k) of the Act defines person interested in the wakf in the following manner. 3 (K ). "person interested in the wakf means any person who is entitled to receive any pecuniary or other benefits from the wakf and includes (i) any person who has a right to worship or to perform any religious rite in a mosque, idgah, imambara, dargah, khangah, maqbara, graveyard or any other religious institution connected with the wakf or to participate in any religious or charitable institution under the wakf; (ii) the wakf and any descendant of the wakf and the mutawalli; ( 7 ) IT is obvious that person in the above definition is natural person and not a juristic (sic. juridical) person. Hence, a company, or an incorporated body with perpetual succession cannot be treated as "person interested" in wakf. Admittedly the petitioner is a society interested in educational and economic welfare of Muslims. It does not claim to be a person interested as per clause (i) of sub-section (k) of Section 3 of the Act nor does it claim as wakf, descendant of wakf or mutawalli. No material is placed before this Court to show that petitioner is in any manner connected with hazrath Syed Ali Ishaq Madina Vali Dargah. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, petitioner cannot be treated as "person interested" in the wakf. At its instance, therefore, this Writ Petition would not lie. It is well settled principle of judicial review that the power can be exercised only at the instance of aggrieved party. Every person, be it natural person or juristic (sic. juridical) person remotely connected with the case cannot be conferred with locus standi to invoke this Court s power of judicial review. The Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. Whether the impugned order is illegal ( 8 ) IT is necessary to analyze the impugned Government Order in G. O. Ms. No. 44, dt. 27-12-2003. It shows that Hon ble chief Minister during his visit to Haj House at nampally, Hyderabad, made announcement for acquiring premises bearing H. No. 5-09-98 admeasuring 3,800 Sq. yards, adjacent to haj House for the purpose of parking, and other purposes. No. 44, dt. 27-12-2003. It shows that Hon ble chief Minister during his visit to Haj House at nampally, Hyderabad, made announcement for acquiring premises bearing H. No. 5-09-98 admeasuring 3,800 Sq. yards, adjacent to haj House for the purpose of parking, and other purposes. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the A. P. Wakf Board sent proposals for acquiring the land to the district Collector who opined that an amount of Rs. 10. 80 crores (Rupees ten crores and eighty lakhs only) is required for acquisition. The CEO of Wakf Board was asked to deposit 80% of the total cost i. e. , Rs. 8. 08 crores (Rupees eight crores and eight lakhs only) with the District Collector, Hyderabad, for initiating land acquisition proceedings in the matter. By letter dt. 29-8-2001 the CEO addressed the Government in this regard. After considering the matter, the government directed release of rs. 6,63,03,674 (Rupees six crores sixty- three lakhs three thousand six hundred and seventy four only) by the District Collector, visakhapatnam being the balance of compensation payable due to A. P. Wakf board, and further directed the District collector, Visakhapatnam, to send the said amount to the District Collector, Hyderabad. Paragraph 3 of the G. O. reads as under: 3. The Government after careful consideration of the issue and keeping in view the earlier orders issued vide references 1st to 4th read above hereby decided to acquire the land of 3800 Sq. yards (i. e. H. No. 5-09-98) adjacent to Haj house for parking purpose of Haj Pilgrims and others by initiating land acquisition proceedings through Collector, Hyderabad and accordingly order that the balance of compensation amount due to A. P. State Wakf Board from the District collector, Visakhapatnam (i. e. , rs. 6. 63 crores) in respect of Wakf land of Devada Village, Visakhapatnam district alienated to NTPC and HNPCL shall be deposited with the District collector, Hyderabad as shown below:1. The share of encroachers (i. e. , 35%) in respect of area of Acs. 153. 49 which is free from encroachments Rs. 1,20,37,337. 00 2. The compensation to be paid to wakf board (both shares of wakf board, and govt. (i. e. , 35% + 30%) for the land handed over to HNPCL (i. e. , 370. 71) acres Rs. 5,42,16,337. 00 total Rs. 6,63,03,674. 153. 49 which is free from encroachments Rs. 1,20,37,337. 00 2. The compensation to be paid to wakf board (both shares of wakf board, and govt. (i. e. , 35% + 30%) for the land handed over to HNPCL (i. e. , 370. 71) acres Rs. 5,42,16,337. 00 total Rs. 6,63,03,674. 00 the District Collector, Visakhapatnam district is requested to take necessary immediate action as ordered in para 3 above. ( 9 ) ON a reading of the above portion of impugned order, it becomes clear that the balance of compensation in respect of wakf land in Devada Village due to alienation of the land to National Thermal Power corporation (NTPC) and Hinduja National power Corporation Limited (HNPCL) shall be deposited with the District Collector, hyderabad, for the purpose of acquisition. This only means that the amount ordered to be released by the District Collector, visakhapatnam, is payable to State Wakf board, but to be deposited with the District collector for the purpose of acquisition of land. The amount is due not to Dargah, visakhapatnam, but the amount is due to wakf Board. ( 10 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has also placed before this Court two government Orders being G. O. Ms. No. 711, revenue (Assignments. I) Department, dt. 5-10-1999, and G. O. Ms. No. 239 revenue (Assignment. I) Department, dt. 22-3-1999. These two Government orders show that Devada is an inam village and certain lands vested with the government under Section 2a of the Andhra pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. These lands were claimed by A. P. Wakf Board relying on Judgment of the Supreme Court in sayyed Ali v. A. P. Wakf Board (2 supra ). The Government of Andhra Pradesh was not a party in the appeal before the Supreme court. Therefore, to avoid prolonged litigation between the Government and the a. P. Wakf Board, the Government by g. O. Ms. No. 239, dt. 22-3-1999 ordered alienation of land in Devada Village in favour of HNPCL at the rate of Rs. 2. 25 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs twenty five thousand only) per acre. The Government ordered apportionment of said amount in the following manner. (A) 30% of the amount shall be credited to the Government account. (b) 35% of the amount shall be paid to the Wakf Board. 2. 25 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs twenty five thousand only) per acre. The Government ordered apportionment of said amount in the following manner. (A) 30% of the amount shall be credited to the Government account. (b) 35% of the amount shall be paid to the Wakf Board. (c) 35% of the amount shall be paid to the occupants/encroachers, if any. (d) The cost of the trees and structures shall be estimated and paid to the persons interested. ( 11 ) BY G. O. Ms. No. 711, dt. 5-10-1999, for the same reasons, the Government ordered alienation of Acs. 836. 90 i. e. , remaining extent of land in Devada Village in favour of NTPC at the rate of Rs. 2. 25 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs twenty five thousand only ). The Government also ordered apportionment of the amounts in the same manner as in earlier G. O. ( 12 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner disputes the contention that A. P. Wakf Board and the Government have a share in the property. This question cannot be decided in these proceedings for two reasons. No evidence is placed before this Court to show that A. P. Wakf Board has no right in the property. Indeed, the Judgment of the supreme Court in Sayyed Ali v. A. P. Wakf board (2 supra) shows that A. P. Wakf Board has exclusive right to the property covered by title deed No. 42. Secondly, A. P. Wakf board does not dispute the contention that compensation has been ordered to be apportioned among the encroachers on one hand and A. P. Wakf Board and the government on the other hand. When A. P. Wakf Board itself has no objection for apportionment of compensation for Devada lands, I am afraid, I cannot hold otherwise, especially when the petitioner has no locus standi. ( 13 ) THE submission that the impugned order is issued in violation of Sec. 32 (2) (e) of the Act is without any substance. Section 32 of the Act deals with powers and functions of Wakf Board. ( 13 ) THE submission that the impugned order is issued in violation of Sec. 32 (2) (e) of the Act is without any substance. Section 32 of the Act deals with powers and functions of Wakf Board. Sub-clause (iii) of clause (e) of sub-section (2) of Section 32 of the Act is to the effect that when any Wakf has ceased to exist or has become incapable of achievement to the income of the wakf shall be applied to any other object, which shall be similar to the original object or for the benefit of the poor or for the purpose of promotion of knowledge and learning in the Muslim community. Haj Committee Act, 2002 is enacted with object of establishing haj Committee of India and State Haj committees for making arrangements for pilgrimage of Muslims for Haj and matters connected thereto. If the land is acquired for the purpose of providing better facilities for the Muslims, who attend Haj House in connection with the Haj, it cannot be said that the purpose is not helping the poor muslims. As observed by me hereinabove, the money now ordered to be released for the purpose of acquisition is not only the amount of share of A. P. Wakf Board, but also the share of encroachers as well as the government share. Therefore, there is no contravention of the provisions of the Act. It should not be ignored that the A. P. State wakf Board constituted under the Wakf Act is entrusted with the duty of administering and supervising all wakfs within the State of andhra Pradesh whether created before or after commencement of the Wakf Act. The interest of Hazrath Syed Ali Ishaq Madina vali Dargah, Visakhapatnam is in no manner affected by the impugned G. O. because as submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the A. P. Wakf Board, an amount of rs. 5. 00 crores (Rupees five crores only) has already been kept in Fixed Deposit and the amount now ordered is in addition to the said amount. ( 14 ) IN the result, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.