JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent No. 1, Sri Abu Akram, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3, the Government Pleader for Home for respondent No. 4 and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, the learned counsel for respondent No. 5. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the action of the respondent No. 3 in issuing the proceedings No. R3/06/RENT/HYD/2020-ZONE(1)B, dtd. 21/11/2020. By the impugned proceedings, the respondent No. 3 has accorded tenancy on rental basis in favour of respondent No. 5 in respect of shop bearing No. 5/6/424, admeasuring 12 x 11 feet, situated within the area of DARGAH-E-YOUSUFIAN, Nampally, Hyderabad for a period of eleven (11) months from the date of the order, by fixing the rental value at 10,000/- per month. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that originally, the petitioner was allotted the subject shop by the respondent No. 3 on monthly rental basis at the rate of Rs.1,000.00 for a period of 11 months commencing from 12/7/2002 and after expiry of the same, the tenancy continued from month to month basis. When the respondent No. 5 tried to interfere with his possession, the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S. No. 1432 of 2014 seeking perpetual injunction on the file of III Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court wherein, status quo order was granted in favour of the petitioner. That at present, the suit is posted to 17/12/2020 for cross-examination of P.W.1. In spite of pending the above proceedings, the respondent No. 3 has issued the impugned proceedings in favour of respondent No. 5 allotting the subject shop in his favour, without following the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1995 on putting the petitioner on notice. 4. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in umpteen judgments that allotment of government property is akin to distribution of largesse and the same cannot be allotted/distributed otherwise than by following the procedure, which is in consonance with provisions of Article 14. Essence and core of Article 14 is Wednesbury principle, which ensures fairness in State action. The Wakf Board is a statutory authority created under the Act and is enjoined to preserve, protect and better utilise wakf properties and therefore is enjoined a public duty. Essence and core of Article 14 is Wednesbury principle, which ensures fairness in State action. The Wakf Board is a statutory authority created under the Act and is enjoined to preserve, protect and better utilise wakf properties and therefore is enjoined a public duty. It cannot act arbitrarily and deal with property of wakf as if it is a proprietary owner of said property, having all rights of disposition/alienation. 5. The principles laid down in Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, (1979) 3 SCC 489 . followed in Kasturi Lal Lakshmi Reddy v. State of Jammu & Kashmir; (1980) 4 SCC 1 . Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India; (2012) 3 SCC 1 . Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy.; (2014) 9 SCC 516 . Bharti Airtel Limited v. Union of India; (2015) 12 SCC 1 . Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Ltd.; (2018) 4 SCC 218 . Bharti Airtel Ltd. V. Union of India; (2015) 12 SCC 1 . Akhil Bharatiya Upbhokta Congress v. State of Mahdya Pradesh, (2011) 5 SCC 29 : JT 2011 (4) SC 311). cannot be ignored in the matter of such allotment. 6. The authorities should had put the shops for auction which could had fetched much higher price instead of extending the lease in favour of persons to their liking in an arbitrary manner. Having regard to the above and considering the fact that the extension period of tenancy granted in favour of respondent No. 5 expired in the month of October, 2021, the official respondents are directed not to extend the tenancy further in favour of respondent No.5 or any other party on the basis of any private negotiations, Board Resolutions or orders of the Executive Officers of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall put the shops for allotment through public auction only. They shall fix the date for notification of public auction of the shops for allotment in public domain on the official website and publish the notification in two widely circulated local newspapers, including one Urdu newspaper and conduct the auction in open, transparent manner and shall allot the shops to the highest bidder therein on such terms and conditions as the Board may consider fit. 7. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. 7. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.