Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Gauri Godse, J.
Samir Gulam Shaikh & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra , Department of Minority & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 3640 of 2021 with Interim Application No. 16757 of 2023 In Writ Petition No. 3640 of 2021
Decided On : 10-06-2024
Waqf - Waqf Property Development - Waqf Act, 1995 - Sections 83(2), 83(9), 97 - The court analyzed the provisions of the Waqf Act, particularly Sections 83(2) and 83(9), which define the locus standi of interested and aggrieved persons in Waqf matters. The court emphasized that while an interested person can approach the Waqf Tribunal, only an aggrieved person can invoke the revisional jurisdiction under Section 83(9). The court found that the petitioner, claiming to be a devotee and thus an interested party, had the right to challenge the Tribunal's decision that quashed the State Government's resolution canceling a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the development of Waqf property. The court's interpretation of these sections influenced its decision to allow the petitioner's challenge.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the Waqf Tribunal's order that allowed the developer's application under Section 83(2) of the Waqf Act, quashing the State Government's resolution to cancel a NOC for developing Waqf property. The petitioner claimed to be an interested party and aggrieved by the Tribunal's decision, which he argued would prevent him from offering prayers at the Waqf property.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had a legitimate interest in the Waqf property as a devotee and was thus an aggrieved person entitled to challenge the Tribunal's order. The court noted that the NOC was allegedly obtained through fraudulent means, and the State Government's resolution to cancel it was valid.
Issues: Whether the petitioner had the locus standi to challenge the Waqf Tribunal's order and whether he was an aggrieved person under the Waqf Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the definitions of 'interested person' and 'aggrieved person' in the Waqf Act are interdependent. A person can be considered aggrieved if their rights or interests are adversely affected by a decision, and the petitioner, as a devotee, had a right to challenge the Tribunal's order.
Final Decision: The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, allowing the challenge to the Waqf Tribunal's order and tagging the petition with a related civil revision application for further hearing.
JUDGMENT
BASIC FACTS:
1. This petition is filed to challenge the judgment and order dated 11th April 2019, passed by the Maharashtra State Waqf Tribunal allowing the Waqf Application No. 01/2010 filed by respondent no.5 under section 83 (2) of the Waqf Act, 1995 ('said Act'). By the impugned judgment and order, the resolution passed by the State Government on 25th May 2018 and letter dated 19th December 2018, issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board, are quashed and set aside.
2. By the resolution dated 25th May 2018, the State Government, in the exercise of the powers under Section 97 of the said Act, directed the Maharashtra State Board of Waqf to cancel the No Objection Certificate ('NOC') dated 25th July 2011, issued for the development of the property belonging to respondent no.4-Waqf. By the letter dated 19th December 2018, the Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board authorized the Regional Waqf Officer to file a criminal complaint against the trustee of respondent no.4-Waqf and respondent no.5, who was appointed as the developer to develop the Waqf's property.
3. The petitioner claims to be an interested party in respondent no.4-Waqf and, feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, has filed this petition. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 and 5 raised a preliminary objection on the locus of the petitioner to challenge the judgment and order passed by the Waqf tribunal.
PRELIMINARY OBJECTION:
4. The learned counsel for respondents no. 4 and 5 raised the preliminary objection on two counts. The first objection is that the petitioner has no locus to file the writ petition as he is neither an interested party nor an aggrieved party. The second objection is that the petition may not be entertained as there is an alternate remedy of filing a revision under Section 83(9) of the said Act.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
5. In response to the preliminary objections raised on behalf of respondents nos. 4 and 5, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the NOC dated 25th July 2011, is a forged document and that such NOC was never issued by the Chief Executive Officer. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner, being a devotee of the said Waqf, is an interested party. The petitioner, being a devotee, has a right to offer his prayers at the Waqf property and thus is an aggrieved party as he will not be able to offer his prayers if the Waqf property is developed, in view of the NOC.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, thus, submitted that the petitioner, being an interested party as well as an aggrieved party, has the locus to challenge the judgment and order passed by the Waqf Tribunal. With reference to the preliminary objection that there is an alternate remedy of filing a revision application under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the remedy under Section 83(9) enables a party to file a revision application in this court. Thus, according to him, there is no substance in the objection raised that the petition may not be entertained on the ground of the availability of an alternate remedy. Even if a revision application is filed to challenge the impugned order, the same would lie before this court. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only the nomenclature of the litigation would change; however, the scope of the challenge would remain the same.
7. In support of the submission that the petitioner is an interested party as well as an aggrieved party, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the pleadings in the memo of the petition and the petitioner's short affidavit, additional affidavit and affidavit-in-rejoinder. By relying upon the pleadings, he submitted that respondents nos. 4 and 5 have practised fraud to grab the Waqf's property. He submitted that the Waqf Board had filed a written statement and an affidavit dated 20th September 2021 before the Waqf Tribunal and contended that the resoluti
The definitions of 'interested person' and 'aggrieved person' in the Waqf Act are interrelated, allowing a devotee of a Waqf property to challenge decisions affecting their rights to access and utili....
Point of Law : It is therefore evident that despite fact that revisionist was removed from his post as Mutawalli/Secretary of managing committee of waqf, application filed by him under Section 83(2) ....
The rejection of a plaint for lack of cause of action must be substantively justified; merely asserting lack of merit without proper consideration of presented evidence is insufficient.
Civil courts retain jurisdiction to determine eviction claims even if waqf status is asserted, unless unequivocally proven as such. Defendants cannot contest landlord's title without substantiating t....
The main legal principle established is that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, Revenue Court, and other authorities in respect of any dispute relating to a waqf property is barred by Section 85 of....
The key legal principle established in the judgment is that the grant of interim injunction by the Waqf Tribunal must be based on the plaintiff's establishment of possession of the property at the ti....
The property was determined to be Wakf, with sales executed without the Wakf Board's sanction declared void, affirming the Muthavalli's right to maintain the suit.
Point of Law : Due process need not mean only an active process initiated by the owner of the property.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
