Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Ameer Hussain A. – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Officer, Kerala State Wakf Board – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks a writ against an order issued by the waqf board. (Para 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding the legality and jurisdiction of the order. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's observations on proper channeling of appeals under the waqf act. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. final ruling on the petition's maintainability and the pathway for appealing. (Para 14) |
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 3rd respondent Chief Executive Officer of the Kerala State Waqf Board and a declaration that the 3rd respondent has no authority to pass such an order; a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent Chief Executive Officer to reconsider the matter in accordance with law, within a time frame.
2. It is challenging Ext.P1 communication dated
Petitioner must challenge Waqf Board order before the Waqf Tribunal, not High Court under Article 226.
Jurisdiction under Article 226 is not maintainable when a Waqf Tribunal is functioning; violations should be addressed through the established statutory remedies.
Maintainability of challenges to Waqf Board orders requires pursuit through the Waqf Tribunal, rather than direct approaches to the High Court.
Disputes regarding waqf matters must be addressed in designated tribunals rather than in High Court directly.
A writ petition challenging an order related to Waqf management is maintainable directly in the High Court if the Waqf Tribunal is not functioning, under the provisions of the amended Waqf Act.
Parties must seek statutory remedies under the Waqf Act before pursuing matters in High Court when appropriate forums exist.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board lacks inherent power to review its own orders; disputes must be addressed by the Waqf Tribunal as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board lacks inherent power to review its own orders, and disputes must be addressed before the Waqf Tribunal as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
The court stressed the need for expeditious consideration of pending matters before the Kerala State Wakf Board under the relevant statutory provisions.
The court established that the WAQF Board has the authority to take over the administration of a WAQF under Section 65(5) without issuing a separate notice if the parties were already notified about ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
