ORDER :

R. Subramanian, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order of the Wakf Tribunal, Thanjavur, dated 19.09.2007 made in W.O.P. No. 4 of 2002. The said petition came to be filed seeking the following reliefs :

(i) Declaring that the right to mutawalliship for the administration and management for Jumia Pallivasal, Maln Pallivasal and Sheik Farid Valivulla Wakf, notified Wakf No. G.S.410/TNJ. Madukkur, Pattukottai Taluk, is not hereditary.

(ii) Declaring that the Jamathars (Muslim congregation) of Jumia Pallivasal, Mela Pallivasal, Madukkur have the right to elect the committee of Mutawallis for the above Wakf, to be approved by first respondent.

(iii) Declaring that the Committee consisting of 30 members elected by Jamathars of the above Jumia Pallivasal, Mela Pallivasal, Madukkur on 21.12.2001 are entitled to manage and administer the above Wakf for a period of 3 years

(iv) Declaring that the appointment of second and third respondents as joint Mutavallis for the above said Wakf by the first respondent by its order dated 06.08.2002 in item No. 10/2001 is invalid after setting aside the above order of first respondent

(v) Directing the respondents to pay costs and thus render justice.

2. The contention of the petitioners before the Wakf Tribunal was that the Jumia Pallivasal, Mela Pallivasal and Sheik Farid Valiullah Wakf, Madukkur, Pattukkottai Taluk notified as Tamilnadu Wakf Board were under the management of the elected representatives of the Muslim community of Madukkur. It is stated that a Committee consisting 10 committee members was elected for the period from 29.12.1997 to 28.12.2000. The Wakf Board has also approved the said appointment.

3. At the meeting of Jamathdars held on 21.12.2001, a Committee consisting of 30 members was elected to act as Mutawallis for a period of 3 years. Out of 10 persons elected in the year 1997, two persons had died and the remaining eight members have also sent a letter on 24.12.2001 to the Wakf Board stating that they have handed over the administration to the newly elected Trustees. The letter was sent by the Jamathdars seeking approval of the election of 30 members committee. It is the further claim of the petitioners that the 4th and 5th respondents, who are the descendants of the Wakif had objected to the elected committee being allowed to administer the Wakf. Pursuant to the said objection, the Wakf Board appears to have conducted an enquiry and passed an order dated 06.08.2002 appointing the second and third respondents as joint Mutawallis. Contending that the appointment of the respondents 2 and 3 as joint Mutawallis on the basis of a hereditary succession is alien to Mohammedan law, the petitioners sought for the declaratory reliefs as aforesaid and also to set aside the order dated 06.08.2002.

4. This petition was resisted by the second respondent contending that as per the proforma of the Wakf, mode of appointment of Mutawallis is governed by the rule of succession and the eldest male member of the 2 families are entitled to be appointed as Muttawallis. It is also noted that the rule of succession is hereditary. As per the proforma, the rule of succession to the office of Mutawalli subject matter of Wakf was by custom and usage since the original Wakf nama was missing. It was the further contention of the second respondent that Jamathdars have no right to nominate a Committee in the place of the original Mutawallis by overlooking the rule of succession as found in the proforma issued by the Wakf Board in the year 1956 itself.

5. The Wakf Board, which is cited as the first respondent, filed a counter affidavit stating that the petition itself is not maintainable. It also claimed that no proceedings were initiated suo motu under Section 63 of the Wakf Act to enable the petitioners to approach the Wakf Tribunal. It was also contended that as per the report of the competent authority, after holding proper enquiry, the rule of succession to the office of Mutawalli