JUDGMENT :

1. The present challenge has been directed against an order passed by the Waqf Tribunal, whereby the application filed by the present petitioners under Order XXII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being substituted as heirs and legal representatives of the mutwalli in the proceeding pending before the tribunal, on the death of the erstwhile mutwalli, was rejected.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that it was well within the jurisdiction of the tribunal to invoke powers, both under Order XXII Rule 3 as well as Order XXII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for the purpose of allowing such application, thereby permitting the petitioners to continue the proceedings in place of the deceased mutwalli.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners places specific reliance on sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 (for short “the 1995 Act”) as well as Rule 27 of the Waqf Rules, 2001 to highlight such contention. It is further argued that, as per the Tailtnama itself, it was the will of the waqif for the mutwalliship to devolve, on the demise of the mutwalli, on the waqif’s male descendants. As such, despite having ampl