The main legal point established is that the rights of the villages to use the burial ground were not affected by changes in the description of the lands, and any disputes over the management of the lands should be resolved in accordance with the law.

1. This petition is filed by respondent No.1 in Application No.5/2004 before the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Bengaluru, aggrieved by the order dated 28.06.2010 passed by the Tribunal allowing the said application filed by respondents 3 & 4 herein namely Sri Baba Jan Sab and Md. Akbar respectively. They had filed the said application under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995 seeking the following reliefs:

i. declaring that the villagers of Muslim Community from Shaik Ali Risala and Ahmed Khan Risala Village of Hollena Halli Grama of Thippasandra Hobli have right to use as Khabarstan burial ground (the suit schedule properties;

ii. pass an order permanently restraining the respondents and other residents of Ahmed Khan Risala Village Muslim Community from interfering with the enjoyment of the schedule lands as Khabarstan lands of Hollenhalli Grama Panchayat along with costs of this suit.

2. The suit schedule lands are land bearing Sy.No.9 measuring 2 acres 11 guntas, Sy.No.10 measuring 3 acres 22 guntas and Sy.No.11 measuring 38 guntas situated at Hullenhalli Village, Thippasandra Hobli, Magadi Taluk. They are described with common boundaries in the application.

3. According to the applicants/respondents 3 & 4 herein, they are residents of Shaik Ali Risala of Thippasandra Hobli, whereas, respondents therein are residents of Ahmed Khan Risala of Thippasandra Hobli, both situated in Magadi Taluk, the suit schedule wakf properties, fell within the jurisdiction of Hullenahalli Gram Panchayat; they were meant for the purpose of burial of dead bodies of people belonging to muslim community of the two hamlets (Shaik Ali Risala and Ahmed Khan Risala). Applicants contended that people of both the hamlets were using the suit schedule lands as burial ground and there were several tombs of both the villagers.

4. It is the case of the applicants that a notification dated 29.09.1965 was issued under Section 5(2) of the Wakf Act by the Karnataka State Board of Wakfs (for short, ‘Wakf Board’), which was published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 08.02.1968 declaring the suit schedule lands as wakf properties. In the said notification, Sy.No.11 measuring 3 acres 38 guntas was shown as Khabarstand Sunni of Ahmed Khan Risala Village. However, subsequently, the Wakf Board issued a corrigendum dated 29.09.1988 which was published in the Karnataka Gazette on 06.07.1989 by which the name of the wakf was shown as Khabarstan Sunni and survey numbers were shown as of Hullenahalli Grama, Thippasandra Hobli, Magadi Taluk and the name of Ahmed Khan Risala Village was deleted. It is thus contended that people of muslim community of both the hamlets namely Shaik Ali Risala and Ahmed Khan Risala were entitled to use the suit schedule lands as khabarsta (burial ground). However, respondents therein of Ahmed Khan Risala village obstructed the use of suit schedule lands by Shaik Ali Risala Villagers as burial ground and therefore, applicants were constrained to file an application before the Wakf Tribunal seeking aforementioned reliefs.

5. This application was contested by the present petitioner along with other respondents in the application contending inter alia that the suit schedule lands were granted in favour of Ahmed Khan Risala village for educational purpose and also for the purpose for conducting prayers during Moharram and Idgah and also as burial ground. They urged that the competent authority of the Wakf Department periodically appointed a Committee to manage and look after the affairs of the suit schedule lands and the said committee was looking after the affairs of the suit schedule lands submitting their periodical reports to the concerned authorities. According to respondents therein, the Committee, which was in charge at the time when the objection was filed, was appointed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board vide order dated 04.10.2002.

6. Defendant No.1/petitioner herein contended that he was the President of Masjid-E-Ahmed Khan Risal