Back
2021 Supreme(Mad) 820
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
Nari Akbar Basha – Petitioner
Versus
Dr. D. Farida Banu, The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, Chennai & Others – Respondent
Cont.P. No. 314 of 2021
Decided On : 19-04-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:B. Ram Prasath, Advocate.
For the Respondents: V. Lakshmi Narayanan, Standing Counsel.
Point of Law: Contempt petition can be closed with a liberty to petitioner to revive same after three months period as provided by this Court, if the respondents have not come forward to comply with the remaining part of the order as indicated above.
Headnote:
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 11 and 12 - Contempt Petition - Disobedience of orders - Court has passed order said in position since some re-frame is also required in present Waqf, learned Standing counsel seeks some reasonable time for finalizing the re-framing of scheme of Waqf - Main issue, i.e., removing fourth and fifth respondents from interim management has been complied with, though belatedly by respondents Waqf Board and they have taken the direct management of Wakf concerned
Finding of the court: Because of intervened General Election for the State Assembly and also for getting public opinion after publishing proposal to have a new scheme from public and in order to complete same, only work can be commenced after Election code of conduct comes to an end, i.e., after 2nd May 2021, hence, this Court feels that, a further reasonable time can very well be given to respondents to comply with remaining part of order, for which, this Court feels that, three months time further to comply with remaining part of order and to report before this Court, can be given - Regard to the remaining compliance of finalising new scheme or the modified scheme and to conduct election to new management committee for Waqf concerned, the learned standing counsel for the Wakf Board
Result: Contempt petition closed
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for their wilful and deliberate disobedience and defiance of the orders of this Court, dated 25.11.2019 passed in C.R.P.(NPD).No.3680 of 2019.)
1. This Contempt Petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience of the orders of this Court made in C.R.P (NPD).No.3680 of 2019, dated 25.11.2019.
2. In the said order, this Court has passed the following order:
“26. In view of the said position, since some re-frame is also required in the present Waqf, the learned Standing counsel seeks some reasonable time for finalizing the re-framing of scheme of the Waqf.
27. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and having gone through the materials placed before this Court, this Court is of the considered view that, certainly the Special Officer, in the helm of affairs in lieu of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, is empowered to act as a Waqf Board, till a new Waqf Board is constituted by the State Government. Insofar as the present issue is concerned, since the Waqf deed is required to be re-framed, a reasonable time is required for the Special Officer or the Waqf Board as the case may be, which, in the considered opinion of this Court, is to be fixed as six months.
28. Once the Scheme is re-framed within the outer limit of six months, there would not be further impediment for the Special Officer or the Board, as the case may be, to conduct the election to elect the managing body for administrating the Waqf for the next term of three years.
29. Such exercise of conducting elections, in the opinion of this Court, can be completed within a period of three months thereafter. Therefore, all together within a period of nine months, since all these exercises can be completed, this Court feels that, the present term given to the Adhoc Committee through the order, which was impugned before the Tribunal, can be restricted to the maximum of ten months from today. Therefore, the term of office of the Adhoc Committee shall be seized at the end of 30.09.2020, before which, the aforesaid exercise of re-framing the scheme of the Waqf, has to completed and the election to elect the Managing Committee shall also be completed by the Special Officer / Waqf Board of the Tribunal.
30. With these orders and directions, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed”.
3. According to the petitioner, despite the said order having been passed by this Court, where a time bound direction was given, the same has not been complied with or executed, therefore, according to the petitioner, the respondents have wilfully committed the contempt of the orders of this Court. Therefore, it necessiated the petitioner to move this Court by filing the present contempt petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also has reiterated the same and seeks indulgence of this Court to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents.
5. However, Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan, learned standing counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, who appeared for the respondents / contemnor, especially the respondents 1 and 2, during last occasion, when the case came up for hearing, i.e., on 15.04.2021, on instructions, would submit that, the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board has taken the direct management of the Waqf concerned and the respondents 4 and 5 of this contempt petition have been removed from the interim management and the said proceedings would be filed before this court.
6. Accordingly, today the proceedings, by which the respondents 4 and 5 herein, who were removed from the interim management of the Waqf concerned has been produced and the copy of the same also had been served on the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
7. On perusal of the same, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, no doubt, the Waqf in question has been taken to direct manage
