Petitioner must challenge Waqf Board order before the Waqf Tribunal, not High Court under Article 226.

JUGMENT :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioner, who is stated to be a permanent member of Palayam Muslim Jamaath, which is a waqf registered under the provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995 , has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus [sic:certiorari] or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to set aside Ext.P8 order dated 27.01.2026 passed by the 3^rd respondent Chief Executive Officer of the Kerala State Waqf Board and a declaration that the 3^rd respondent has no authority to pass such an order; a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3^rd respondent Chief Executive Officer to reconsider the matter in accordance with law, within a time frame.

2. It is challenging Ext.P1 communication dated 27.02.2025 of the 2^nd respondent General Secretary of Palayam Muslim Jamaath that the petitioner moved Ext.P5 representation dated 25.07.2025 before the 1^st respondent Divisional Officer, Kerala State Waqf Board, by contending that the decision taken against the petitioner, as evidenced by Ext.P1 communication dated 27.02.2025, is in violation of Ext.P2 circular dated 13.02.2024 issued by the 1^st respondent Divisional Officer, wherein it is specifically provided that any violation will attract initiation of prosecution under Section 61 of the Waqf Act, 1995 .

3. The petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(C)No.29626 of 2025, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent Divisional Officer, Kerala State Waqf Board to consider Ext.P5 representation dated 25.07.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. On 19.08.2025, when that writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the State Waqf Board submitted that the additional 4^th respondent Chief Executive Officer, who is a competent authority, shall consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 representation dated 25.07.2025, with notice to the petitioner and also to the 2^nd respondent General Secretary of Palayam Muslim Jama-ath. Therefore, by Ext.P6 judgment dated 19.08.2025, this Court disposed of W.P.(C)No.29626 of 2025. Paragraph 4 and also the last paragraph of Ext.P6 judgment reads thus;

“4. The learned Standing Counsel for Kerala State Waqf Board would submit that the additional 4^th respondent Chief Executive Officer, who is the competent authority, shall consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 representation dated 25.07.2025 made by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and also to the 2^nd respondent General Secretary of Palayam Muslim Jama-Ath.

Having considered the submission made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition without expressing anything on the merits of Ext.P5 representation dated 25.07.2025 made by the petitioner, by directing the additional 4^th respondent Chief Executive Officer, Kerala State Waqf Board, to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said representation strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and also to the 2^nd respondent General Secretary of Palayam Muslim Jama-Ath, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, with a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.”

4. It is thereafter that the 3^rd respondent Chief Executive Officer passed Ext.P8 order dated 27.01.2026, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the State Waqf Board for respondents 1 and 3.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Ext.P8 order dated 27