JUDGMENT :

Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.-In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the following relief:

i. Writ of Certiorari quashing notification issued under SRO 351 dated 23.08.1982 by respondent no.1 under endorsement no. CMS(Auqaf)37/82 dated 23.08.1982 to the extent it pertains to notification and publishing of land measuring 18 Marlas falling under Khasra no.1007 in Doda City, Tehsil Doda.

ii. Writ of Prohibition restraining the respondents from charging any rent/premium from the petitioner in respect of land measuring 18 Marlas falling under Khasra no.1007 situated at Doda City, Doda.

iii. Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent to conclude the process of the denotification of land measuring 18 Marlas falling under Khasra no.1007 of Doda City from Wakf property initiated in the year 1992.

2. The aforesaid relief is sought on the ground that on 07.11.2005 Bikrami, one Haji Ghulam Mohd. Bhat purchased a piece of land measuring 18 Marlas falling under Khasra No.1007, from Masjid Committee, Doda, through its Secretary, against consideration of Rs.350/-. He constructed a residential house over the said land. The Jammu & Kashmir Wakaf Act, 1978 (for short, the Act of 1978), came to be enacted after about 25 years of the aforesaid sale. The petitioner’s case is that since the land in question, over which the house was constructed, was purchased 25 years prior to coming into force of the Act of 1978, the said property could not be notified to be Wakaf Property. The petitioner submits that the property in question was purchased by his father from the above Haji Ghulam Mohd. Bhat in the year 1995 and was later on gifted to him by his father and the property in question came in his possession and is presently in his possession. According to the petitioner, in the year 1982, on some misinformation, the land came to be notified and included in the Wakaf Property, Doda vide notification dated 30.08.1982. The petitioner further pleads that when erstwhile owner Haji Ghulam Mohd. Bhat came to know about the notification referred to above, he sought denotification of property referred to above by making representation before Wakaf Committee Doda, which vide resolution dated 30.05.1992 recommended for its denotifcation. He submits that the property in question was gifted to him by his father and after such gift he also represented before the authorities for denotification of the property. It is the case of the petitioner that despite such representations made for denotification of property in question, authorities failed to communicate any decision.

3. The main ground taken up by the petitioner is that once the property was sold by Masjid Committee, Doda, to Haji Ghulam Mohd. Bhat, the property could not be notified as a Wakaf Property. The sale had taken place in the year 1953 and J&K Wakaf Act came into force in the year 1978, as such, the Act of 1978 is not applicable to the property in question. The notification dated 23.08.1982 issued vide SRO 351 insofar as it relates to the land in question, i.e., 18 marlas of land, as Wakaf is unauthorized and is required to be quashed.

4. Respondent no.3 in its objections has disputed the maintainability of the writ on the ground that the remedy of filing writ is not available and that the writ has been filed at a belated stage inasmuch as there is inordinate delay and laches. The petitioner has not availed the remedy of appeal in case he was aggrieved of the notification in respect of the property in question, whereby it has been notified as Wakaf property.

5. The Wakaf property cannot be sold, alienated and any sale, gift, exchange shall be void ab initio. It is also stated that the petitioner’s claim that land in question was purchased by Haji Ghulm Mohd. Bhat from Masjid Committee through its Secretary is also not tenable because same had no legal sanctity.

6. Heard learned counsel for parties and considered the record on the file.

7. The main contention of the petitioner is that Haji