Back
2002 Supreme(Kar) 42
Karnataka High Court
GULISTHAN SHADI MAHAL TRUST - Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA BOARD OF WAKFS - Respondent
Decided On : 01-16-02
W.P. : 6359 of 1994
D.L.N.RAO, YOGANDER SINHA
The main legal point established in the judgment is the finality and conclusiveness of the list of wakfs published under Section 5(2) of the Wakf Act, the limitations on challenging such a list, and the need for the dispute to be confined between the Wakf Board, the mutawalli, and persons interested in the wakf. The judgment also emphasizes that the registration of a Trust cannot bind the Wakf Board if the property has been notified as a wakf property before the Trust was registered.
Headnote:
WAKF - Dispute over Property Declaration - Wakf Act, 1954, Section 5(2) - The court discussed the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1954, and the legal implications of the property being declared as a wakf. It highlighted the finality and conclusiveness of the list of wakfs published under Section 5(2) and the limitations on challenging such a list. The court emphasized that the dispute must be confined between the Wakf Board, the mutawalli, and persons interested in the wakf, and that the remedy against the publication of the list is to institute a civil suit within a year of the publication. The court also noted that the property in question had been notified as a wakf property before the Trust was registered, and therefore, the registration of the Trust could not bind the Wakf Board.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-Trust claimed to be a Public Trust managed by a Board of Trustees and sought relief from the court against being declared as a wakf under the Wakf Act. The State Government had notified the petitioner-Trust as a Wakf institution, leading to a dispute over its status. The petitioner-Trust contested the jurisdiction of the Wakf Board and the initiation of enquiry proceedings against it.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the writ petitions, discharged the rule, and reserved liberty for the petitioner-Trust to approach the appropriate Civil Court if permissible under the law and the provisions of the Wakf Act. The court emphasized that the relief sought in the second writ petition paled into insignificance in view of its observations in the first writ petition.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the dispute over the property's declaration as a wakf and the jurisdiction of the Wakf Board to initiate enquiry proceedings against the petitioner-Trust.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the finality and conclusiveness of the list of wakfs published under Section 5(2) of the Wakf Act and the limitations on challenging such a list. It highlighted the need for the dispute to be confined between the Wakf Board, the mutawalli, and persons interested in the wakf, and the remedy against the publication of the list to be through a civil suit within a year of the publication. The court also noted that the property in question had been notified as a wakf property before the Trust was registered, and therefore, the registration of the Trust could not bind the Wakf Board.
Final Decision: The court rejected the writ petitions, discharged the rule, and reserved liberty for the petitioner-Trust to approach the appropriate Civil Court if permissible under the law and the provisions of the Wakf Act. The parties were directed to bear their own costs.
( 1 ) PETITIONER in W. P. No. 6359 of 1994 claims that it is a Public Trust and is managed by Board of Trustees. The object of the Trust seems to be to secure permanence to manage and augment its resources for the benefit of the Muslim community. It appears that in the beginning of the year 1940, public-spirited muslim residents of the city had formed a social sports club by name 'islamic Club'. The main purpose of the club was to conduct lectures, dinner parties for the unity and harmony of the muslim community and these activities were held in a rented bungalow situate at Promenade Road near Coles Park. Some time later, the club members purchased a house property at Old Poor House Road. Since the place was not suitable for the club, the members of the club, with the assistance of public donations and others, purchased 'gulisthan Shadi mahal' situate at Infantry Road for a valuable consideration under a registered sale deed dated 11-7-1946 in the name of 13 Managing Committee members of Islamic Club. Petitioner-Trust further states that with their efforts and public help, they had built permanent structures and used the same for public purposes by leasing the same for marriages and other social functions for the benefit of the public for a reasonable rent, and the place is exclusively used for social functions including marriages and is never used for religious purposes or pious purposes.
( 2 ) THE State Government by a notification published in the Mysore gazette dated 27-7-1965, had notified the petitioner-Trust as a Wakf institution in exercise of its powers under Section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act. A copy of the notification is produced by the respondents along with their statement of objections. It is seen from the notification that "gulisthan Shadi Mahal Sunni" is registered as a wakf and the nature and job of the wakf is shown as marriages and social functions of the community. After publication of the notification, one of the 13 purchasers of the property in question by name 't. Mohammed Khaleel alias Zaeem', who was managing the social club had filed a suit in Original Suit No. 123 of 1966 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore, to delete Item no. 230 in the notification dated 27-7-1965 and further to declare that "gulisthan Shadi Mahal" is not a wakf. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff dies on 22-10-1968 and after his death, the surviving purchasers did not pursue the proceedings and therefore the suit came to be disposed off as having abated.
( 3 ) THE petitioner claims that it is a public Trust registered on 7-2-1972 before the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Shivajinagar, Bangalore, which is long after the declaration of the institution as wakf under the wakf Act and in spite of such registration, petitioner-Trust continued to subject itself to the jurisdiction of the Karnataka Board of Wakfs in respect of various provisions, including payment of the statutory contributions, reporting of vacancies of the Trustees and approval of the Trustees etc.
( 4 ) SOME time in the month of May 1991, the President of the petitioner-Trust had filed a written complaint dated 2-5-1991 before the respondent-Board for holding an enquiry in the working of the petitioner-Trust. In pursuance thereof, the Board had issued a show-cause notice dated 3-6-1991, inter alia directing the petitioner-Trust to show cause as to why action should not be initiated against it for removal from the mutawalliship (membership of Board of Trustees) for various acts of omissions and irregularities stated in the notice itself. The notice was replied by the petitioner-Trust by its letter dated 17-6-1991. The board not being satisfied with the explanation offered, had appointed an enquiry Officer to inquire into the allegations made in the show-cause notice dated 3-6-1991. Aggrieved by the initiation of enquiry proceedings, petitioner-Trust is before this Court inter alia, seeking the following reliefs. They are:i. To direct
