Back
2016 Supreme(Chh) 192
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
Abdul Rasheed Memon S/o Late Haji Abdul Musa - Applicant
Versus
Chhattisgarh State Wakf Board, Through Its Chief Executive Officer - Non-applicants
CR No. 19 of 2016
Decided On : 19-08-2016
For the Applicant :Shri B.P. Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate, Shri Surfraj Khan, Advocate.
Headnote:
WAQF Act, 1995 - Section 83 - Revision jurisdiction – Claim of compensation - Extending of tenure - The applicant herein filed an application under Section 83 (2) read with Section 94(2) of the Act, 1995 stating inter-alia that non applicant No.2 herein was elected on 20-05-2011 as Mutwalli of Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee, as his period has already expired on 19-05-2014 and thereafter, the order has been passed by non-applicant No.1 on 19-05-2014 extending his tenure for a period of one year and thereafter, again the order was passed on 18-05-2015 extending the tenure of non-applicant No.2 for a period of two years. It was further claimed that both the orders are contrary to law and the orders dated 19-05-2014 and 18-05-2015 be set aside and the applicant be declared - Upon notice, respondent No.1 Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board filed its reply stating inter-alia that under Sections 18,60 & 63 of the Act,1995, Waqf Board has the power and jurisdiction to appoint Mutwalli and to appoint Committee. In exercise of power under Section 18,60 & 63 of the Act,1995, such Committee was constituted and the period of such committee was extended i.e. up to 17-05-2017. It was also pleaded that in relation to the said Waqf property, Civil Revision No.142/2011 was filed before the High Court. On 16-02-2012, the appointment of Mutwalli was upheld by this Court and as such the application deserves to be rejected – Held, Thus, the Waqf Board has exercised the power and jurisdiction conferred to him under the Act of 1995 for better management and administration of the waqf property. The learned Waqf Tribunal after careful appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record has reached to a categorical conclusion that order passed by the Waqf Board extending the tenure of non-applicant No.1 as a Mutawalli by order dated 19.05.2014 and 18.05.2015 appointing Mutawalli Managing Committee is in accordance with law - It is pertinent to notice that in the application filed before the Chhattisgarh Waqf Tribunal, the applicant herein only impleaded non-applicant No.2, who was appointed Mutawalli. The applicant neither impleaded the Mutawalli Managing Committee as party respondent nor impleaded other office bearers/members as non-applicants who are also appointed by non-applicant No.1 by order dated 19.05.2015 along with non-applicant No.2 and therefore in absence of Mutawalli Managing Committee and other office bearers and members, the application itself was not maintainable before the Waqf Tribunal, as the Managing Committee as well as the other office bearers were necessary party, and in their absence the application has rightly been rejected by the learned Waqf Tribunal. I am of the considered opinion that the Waqf Tribunal has not committed any jurisdictional error in rejecting the application filed by the applicant herein upholding the order of the Waqf Board appointing managing committee for proper administration and management of Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee and has rightly rejected the application filed by the applicant herein finding no merit – Revision dismissed
1. Invoking revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1995'), the applicant herein has filed the instant revision questioning the order passed by the Chhattisgarh State Waqf Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') by which his application under Section 83(2) read with Section 94(2) of the Act, 1995 has been rejected by the learned Tribunal.
2. The applicant herein filed an application under Section 83 (2) read with Section 94(2) of the Act, 1995 stating inter-alia that non applicant No.2 herein was elected on 20-05-2011 as Mutwalli of Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee, as his period has already expired on 19-05-2014 and thereafter, the order has been passed by non-applicant No.1 on 19-05-2014 extending his tenure for a period of one year and thereafter, again the order was passed on 18-05-2015 extending the tenure of non-applicant No.2 for a period of two years. It was further claimed that both the orders are contrary to law and the orders dated 19-05-2014 and 18-05-2015 be set aside and the applicant be declared as Mutwalli.
3. Upon notice, respondent No.1 Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board filed its reply stating inter-alia that under Sections 18,60 & 63 of the Act,1995, Waqf Board has the power and jurisdiction to appoint Mutwalli and to appoint Committee. In exercise of power under Section 18,60 & 63 of the Act,1995, such Committee was constituted and the period of such committee was extended i.e. up to 17-05-2017. It was also pleaded that in relation to the said Waqf property, Civil Revision No.142/2011 was filed before the High Court. On 16-02-2012, the appointment of Mutwalli was upheld by this Court and as such the application deserves to be rejected.
4. Non-applicant No.2 filed reply in similar line with the reply filed by non-applicant No.1. Waqf Tribunal by its impugned order after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, rejected the application holding that the orders dated 19-05-2014 and 18-05-2015 are in accordance with law. Questioning the legality, validity & correctness of the impugned order, this revision application, as stated above, has been filed.
5. Shri B.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, would submit that the judgment and the finding recorded by the learned Waqf Tribunal is contrary to law. Non-applicant No.1, Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board, has no right, authority and jurisdiction to interfere with the administration and management of Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee and there is no waqf. Therefore, the order passed by non-applicant No.1 to appoint Committee for administration and management in exercise of the power under Sections 18, 60 and 63 of the Act, 1995 is wholly without jurisdiction and without authority of law. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it by law and acted with material irregularity and the finding recorded by the learned Waqf Tribunal is perverse and contrary to the record and impugned order rejecting the application filed by the applicant deserves to be set-aside.
6. Shri Prateek Sharma, learned counsel for non-applicant No.1 Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board, would submit that Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee is a Waqf and Waqf property duly registered with the Waqf Board bearing registration No.92 Nasti No.9/33 and in relation to the said Waqf, the order appointing Mutwalli was challenged by Bashir Rizwi in C.R. No.142/2011 against an order dated 27-07-2011 passed by Waqf Tribunal which was dismissed by this Court finding no merit and as such there is no dispute that Hajrat Fateh Shah Majar & Masjid Trust Committee is a waqf and waqf property. Therefore, no interference is required in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court and the revision deserves to be dismissed, as the Waqf Board has power and jurisdiction to appoint a committee for administration of th
