Judgment : 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board for respondent No.1 and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent No.2. 2. Petitioner is a Managing Committee appointed by the Wakf Board to manage the Wakf Institution, known as Masjid-e-Chanwer Peeran. The said institution is said to be under the management of the petitioner from 2010 onwards. It was initially appointed for a period of two years and the said two years period was extended further by the order of the Board dated 02.07.2012. Since the appointment of the petitioner is for two years that would expire by 01.07.2014. Petitioner states that in the meantime, it has taken various developmental activities, has recovered substantial monies to the Institution and has filed cases against the encroachers, who were squatting on the property of the Wakf Institution without paying any rents. It is stated that at the instance of such persons, W.P.No.7313 of 2013 was filed before this Court so as to displace the petitioner by making allegations that the petitioner is involved in criminal proceedings and to declare it as ineligible. When the said writ petition came up before this Court on 21.11.2013, learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board, who had filed the additional counter affidavit, stated before the Court that required information is collected and the issue is for consideration before the Board. In view of that, this Court adjourned the writ petition to enable the Board to take appropriate decision. 3. It appears that in 55th meeting of the Board held on 25.11.2013 under an additional item No.31 of the agenda, the Board resolved to take the Institution under direct management of the Wakf Board in view of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.7313 of 2013, by removing the petitioner Managing Committee. Questioning the resolution itself, this writ petition is filed. 4. When this Court heard this writ petition on 09.12.2013, following order was passed; “A perusal of the impugned resolution shows that the management of Masjid-e-Chanwar Peeran was taken over as per the directions of this Court in W.P.No.7313 of 2013. Indeed, this Court has not given any such direction. The Chief Executive Officer of the A.P. State Wakf Board, is directed to file an affidavit explaining the basis on which the Wakf Board has come to the conclusion that this Court has given such direction”. Indeed, this Court has not given any such direction. The Chief Executive Officer of the A.P. State Wakf Board, is directed to file an affidavit explaining the basis on which the Wakf Board has come to the conclusion that this Court has given such direction”. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned on two occasions to enable the learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board to file counter. An implead petition was also filed by Mr. Mirza Nisar Ahmed Baig Nizami on behalf of third parties, who are petitioners in W.P.No.7313 of 2013. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the last date of hearing and the learned counsel for the proposed parties, and the matter was adjourned to enable the learned Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board to verify whether any further order is passed by the Board in pursuance of the resolution. Learned Standing Counsel today confirms that no further orders were passed after the impugned resolution. 6. As was already noticed by this Court in the order dated 09.12.2013 as well as in the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.7313 of 2013 dated 21.11.2013, which is extracted hereunder; “The learned Standing Counsel for R1 stated that additional counter affidavit is served on the learned counsel for the petitioners and that the same is being filed in the Registry. He submitted that required information relating to the criminal cases against R2 is collected and that the issue is being under consideration of R1”. In view of the above submissions, the writ petition is adjourned to 02.12.13 to enable R1 to take appropriate decision and report to the Court on the decision so taken this Court did not pass any order giving any direction to the Board either to remove the petitioner committee or to take over the management of the Wakf Institution and W.P.No.7313 of 2013 was disposed of on 02.12.2013 in view of Board’s resolution. Evidently, the resolution passed by the Board on the ground that this Court had given any such direction is, therefore, totally, incorrect and untenable. 7. Even otherwise, it has to be seen that the question of taking a Wakf Institution under direct Management would arise provided there is a vacancy in the office of Muthawalli as provided under Section 65 of the Wakf Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). 7. Even otherwise, it has to be seen that the question of taking a Wakf Institution under direct Management would arise provided there is a vacancy in the office of Muthawalli as provided under Section 65 of the Wakf Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). At present, in the office of Muthawalli, the petitioner committee is appointed by the Board to manage and discharge the affairs of the Wakf Institution and the term of the present committee would continue till 1st July, 2014. Thus, without terminating the petitioner Managing Committee, no vacancy would arise to enable the Board to take over the management. Hence, in terms of Section 65 of the Act, the contingency for the Board is to take over a Wakf Institution under direct management would arise if any vacancy is available, and since no vacancy is existing as on today with reference to the said Institution, the impugned resolution cannot be sustained even under Section 65 of the Act. Thus, looking at both the angles, the impugned resolution is liable to be set aside and is accordingly, set aside. 7. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.