Aktida Ali Khan v. State of U. P. Thru Secy. Minority Welfare Wakf Lko.
2016-01-20
D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, RAJAN ROY
body2016
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT Rajan Roy,J. The petitioner had submitted an application to the Chairperson of the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) on 26 June 2014 for the appointment of the Mutvalli. On the basis of that application, a writ petition was filed before this Court (Writ Petition (M/B) No. 7804 of 2015) for expedition. The Division Bench dismissed the writ petition by a judgment dated 27 August 2015 in the following terms: Hon'ble Shabihul Hasnain,J. Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. Heard Sri G. K. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Q. H. Rizvi for U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board. The petitioner has prayed that the application moved by him before U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow may be directed to be decided expeditiously. No good ground has been made for the prayer. The petition is absolutely misconceived and frivolous. It is accordingly dismissed.? 2. A fresh writ petition has now been filed seeking a mandamus to the Board to appoint a Mutvalli in accordance with the provisions of the Waqf Deed and for restraining the third respondent from taking any decision in relation to the Waqf. 3. Once the earlier writ petition was dismissed, a second writ petition on the same cause of action cannot be instituted. The remedy, if the petitioner has any grievance in regard to the earlier order, is to move appropriate proceedings in that regard. However, we are clearly of the view that the second writ petition is not maintainable. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.