JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. The present revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), arises out of the Judgment dated 09.09.2019, as passed by Learned Waqf Tribunal, West Bengal in O.A. No. 4/2017 whereby and whereunder the said tribunal by the impugned judgment has been pleased to dismiss the petitioner’s application under Section 83(2) of the said Act challenging the Resolution dated 31.08.2016 as passed by Board of Auqaf. The petitioner felt aggrieved and thus, preferred the instant revisonal application.

2. In order to dispose of the instant revisional application fairly and effectively the facts leading to filing of O.A No. 4 of 2017 before the Learned Tribunal are required to be discussed in a nutshell.

3. By executing three deeds of Waqf, one Sk. Amanatullah of 34/1, Watgunge Street, P.S. Watgunge, Khiderpore, Kolkata-700 023 appointed himself as Mutawalli of the said Waqf and it was directed that after his death, his wife would be the Mutawalli and after the death of his wife, the eldest male member in the line of decedents born of womb of the said wife shall be the Mutawalli provided that person is competent and does not renounce Islam and/or become converted to other religion. It is undisputed that after the death of the Waqif as per rules of succession, Sk. Ashrafullah was appointed as Mutawalli and on his death the next surviving decedents viz. Zakir Hussain was appointed as Mutawalli. After the death of Zakir Hussain the present petitioner being the eldest male decedents have applied before the Board for recording his name as Mutawalli but since such request was disputed by the opposite party no. 3 herein as well as the other brothers and sisters including step brothers and sisters of the present petitioner, an enquiry was conducted by the Board. On conclusion of the enquiry the Board by a resolution dated 31.08.2016, came to a finding that the present petitioner cannot be appointed as a Mutwalli on account of his immoral life and his proneness to liquor and by the self same resolution the Board also found that the present opposite party no. 3 is eligible to be appointed as Mutawalli in respect of Sk. Amanatullah Waqf Estate.

4. Feeling aggrieved by the said finding of the Board dated 31.08.2016, the petitioner herein preferred an application under Section 83(2) of the said Act which was dismissed by the learned Tribunal by the impugned judgment.

5. In support of the instant revisional application learned advocate for the petitioner at the very outset draws attention of this Court to the photocopies of the three deeds of Waqf as have been annexed with the instant revisional application. It is contended that the Learned Tribunal while passing the impugned orders has miserably failed to appreciate that the Board while appointing a Mutawalli in respect of the aforementioned Waqf Estate has no other alternative but to follow the mandate of the three Waqf Deeds. It is further argued that the resolution of the Board dated 26.03.2015, ought to have been held by the Learned Tribunal as faulty since the said Board ought not to have direct a field enquiry on the basis of the affidavits sworn by the persons supporting the claim of the present opposite party no. 3. It is contented further that the learned tribunal while passing the impugned order ought to have hold that the field enquiry report dated 07.08.2015, has got no basis in the eye of law, since while conducting such enquiry the persons who are in favour of the present opposite party no. 3 only were asked about the character or the petitioner. It is further argued that learned tribunal did not visualize that the enquiry report dated 07.08.2015, is not only one sided but also the same bears various dates which itself creates a confusion with regard to the genuineness of the same. It is contended further that since the aforesaid enquiry report is pervers