Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Ansar Bee – Appellant
Versus
The Estate Officer & The Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, Chennai & Another – Respondents
W.P. Nos. 17331, 13507, 13510, 13514, 14424, 14426, 14428, 14432, 16963, 17164, 17399, 17371, 18475 & 18479 of 2023 & WMP. Nos. 13181, 13184, 13188, 13935, 13939, 13937, 13941, 16162, 16469, 16340, 16549, 16516, 16517, 16545, 16546, 17705 & 17713 of 2023
Decided On : 03-07-2023
Writ Petition - Challenge to Notices and Orders under Tamil Nadu Public Premises Act, 1975 - Section 2(e)(iii) of the PP Act - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the validity of Section 2(e)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Public Premises Act, 1975 and its relationship with the Wakf Act, 1995. The key legal provisions and interpretations revolved around the repugnancy between the State and Central legislation, the presumption of constitutionality, and the necessity of challenging legislation in a properly constituted writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitions challenged notices issued by the Estate Officer under the Tamil Nadu Public Premises Act, 1975 and the order of eviction passed by the Estate Officer. The petitioners questioned the validity of Section 2(e)(iii) of the PP Act, claiming that the authority acted without jurisdiction.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed all the writ petitions, holding that the power and jurisdiction of the Estate Officer cannot be questioned as long as Section 2(e)(iii) of the PP Act is in force. The court emphasized the presumption of constitutionality and the necessity of challenging legislation in a properly constituted writ petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of Section 2(e)(iii) of the PP Act, the relationship between the State and Central legislation, and the necessity of challenging legislation in a properly constituted writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the presumption of constitutionality and the necessity of challenging legislation in a properly constituted writ petition. It held that the power and jurisdiction of the Estate Officer cannot be questioned as long as Section 2(e)(iii) of the PP Act is in force.
Final Decision: The court dismissed all the writ petitions and directed the petitioners to respond to the show-cause notices or file appeals before the appropriate forum within three weeks. The interim protection granted by the Court was extended by three weeks.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling upon the records of the 1st respondent in PP.No.162/Chen/2022 dated 31.03.2023 and thereby quash the same as illegal, ultravires and arbitrary.)
Common Order
1. The particulars of the petitioners and the proceedings under challenge in these writ petitions are tabulated hereunder:
| S.No. | WRIT PETITION NO. | NAME OF THE PETITIONER | NAME OF THE WAQF | PROCEEDINGS UNDER CHALLENGE |
| 1 | W.P No. 17164/2023 | A.Abdul Salam | Jumma Mosque | Notice issued by the 1st respondent (Estate Officer) in Case No. PP/2/Cudd/2023 dated 16.02.2023. |
| 2 | W.P. No. 16963/2023 | S.Ajaz | Syed Sadiq Mosque and Dargah Waqf | Notice issued by the 1st respondents (Estate Officer and the Chief Executive Officer) in Form-A, Case No. PP/233/TVLR/2022 and quashed the same dated 12.12.2022 |
| 3 | W.P. No. 17399/2023 | Iqbal Ahmed Syeed | Begum Saheba Waqf | Show Cause notice in Case No. PP/254/CHEN/2022 dated 08.02.2022 issued by 1st respondents (Estate Officer and the Executive Officer) |
| 4 | W.P. No. 17371/2023 | P.Murali | Jumma Masjid | Impugned show cause notice in case no. PP/4/CUDD/2023 dated 16.02.2023 by the 1st respondent (Estate Officer). |
| 5 | W.P. No. 17331 of 2023 | Ansar Bee | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque | Impugned Order in case no. PP. No. 162 dated 31/03/2023passed by the 1st respondent (Estate Officer) |
| 6 | W.P. No. 18745 of 2023 | K.P.K. Khaja Mohideen and Sulthan Ibrahim | Mohideen Aandavar Pallivasal, Muslim Jammath Committee | Show Cause Notice and Impugned Petition in PP No. 112/MDU/2021 dated 27/06/2022 passed by the 1st Respondent. |
| 7 | W.P. No. 18749 of 2023 | R. Chelladurai | Mohideen Aandavar Pallivasal, Muslim Jammath Committee | Show Cause Notice and Impugned Petition in PP No. 112/MDU/2021dated 27/06/2022 passed by the 1st Respondent. |
| 8 | W.P. No. 13510 of 2023 | Mohmood Hussain | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Award passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 164 of 2022 dated 31/03/2022. |
| 9 | W.P.No. 13514 of 2023 | Mohmood Hussain | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Award passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 163 of 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
| 10 | W.P.No. 14426 of 2023 | Dr.Hisamuddin Papa | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Order passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 168/CHEN/ 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
| 11 | W.P.No. 14428 of 2023 | Dr.Hisamuddin Papa | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Order passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 167/CHEN/ 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
| 12 | W.P.No.14432 of 2023 | Dr.Hisamuddin Papa | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Order passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 169/CHEN/ 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
| 13 | W.P.No.14424 of 2023 | Dr.Hisamuddin Papa | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Order passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 166/CHEN/ 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
| 14 | 13507/2023 | Mohmood Hussain | Nawab Fazilamuthunnisa Begum Sahiba Mosque & Endowment Wakf | Impugned Order passed by the 1st Respondent in PP No. 161/ 2022 dated 31/03/2023. |
2. The subject matter of challenge in all these writ petitions pertains to either the notices issued by the Estate Officer under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Public Premises [Eviction of unauthorised occupants] Act, 1975 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as “the PP Act”) or the order of eviction passed by the Estate Officer under Section 5 of the PP Act.
3. The notices issued or the orders passed by the Estate Officer under the PP Act, as the case may be, have been challenged only on the ground that the auth
The presumption of constitutionality and the necessity of challenging legislation in a properly constituted writ petition.
The Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Amendment Act, 2010 is void as it is repugnant to the Waqf Act, 1995, which provides an exclusive mechanism for eviction of unautho....
The Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Amendment Act, 2010 is repugnant to the Waqf Act, 1995, rendering it void and ultra vires the Constitution due to conflicting provi....
The court clarified the limitations on the Muthawalli's powers to execute lease agreements and the definition of encroachment under the Kerala Wakf Rules. It also established that the petitioner was ....
The court established that a determination by the Wakf Board under Section 27 of the 1954 Act is final and cannot be revisited, reinforcing the principle of res judicata in property claims.
The entry in the classification column of the relevant revenue entry, enjoys precedence over the entry in the revenue records describing the petition lands as Shamlat Deh.
The Wakf Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction over properties classified as Takia, graveyard, and Maszid, which are deemed public graveyards and cannot be divested by non-user.
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
