JUDGMENT :

(Easwaran S., J.)

Ext.P6 order passed by the Kerala State WAQF Board is under challenge in this writ petition, though an alternative remedy is available under Section 83 of the WAQF Act, 1995 by preferring an appeal before the WAQF Tribunal. Primarily we are concerned with an issue as to whether we should entertain this writ petition despite the existence of an alternative remedy.

2. No doubt, the availability of alternative remedy is not a bar in entertaining the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and it is only a self imposed restraint by the Court. This Court is however required to address this issue especially since, the Court, while admitting the Writ Petition on 6.3.2024 had specifically raised this question and ordered that “the question of maintainability of the Writ Petition will be decided with notice to the party respondents.”

3. Facts succinctly stated are as follows:

The petitioner is the Muthawalli of Abdul Latheef Haji Ismail Sait Dharmasthapanam, which is a WAQF, registered under the provisions of the WAQF Act. The 1st Muthawalli was Abdul Latheef Haji Ismail Sait itself and after his death, his son Muhammed Kasim Abdul Latheef Sai