Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
N. Mohamed Malik – Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Rep. by its Chairman – Respondent
ORDER :
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent namely, the Chief Executive Officer to pass the consequential executive order in furtherance of the resolution, dated 16.07.2025 passed by the first respondent.
2. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the grievance of the petitioner is that the Adirampatnam Madarasatul Salahifi Aththarameel Falahi @ MKN Madarasa Wakf is a registered wakf functioning under the first respondent. There is a scheme, under which, the Muthavallis and the other office bearers, to administer the trust, have to be appointed. While so, the Wakf Board considered the appointment of Muthavallis in the year 2025 for the ensuing term of three years and passed a resolution on 16.07.2025 appointing the Muthavallis. The second respondent, under the scheme of the Wakf Act, 1995, has no other option than to issue a notification executing the resolution of the Wakf Board. On the contrary, he had chosen to refer the matter to the Government under Section 26 of the Wakf Act. The reconsideration or referring the matter under does not arise in
The Chief Executive Officer of a Wakf must issue notifications for appointments made by the Wakf Board unless serious allegations of moral turpitude are present against individuals selected.
The Waqf Board has the authority to remove a Mutawalli under the Waqf Act and appoint an Executive Officer in the interest of the Waqf, affirming the integrity of procedural statutory provisions.
The court reaffirmed the necessity for the Waqf Board to address complaints swiftly regarding trustees and upheld the process for appeal against removals, ensuring adherence to statutory provisions.
The court emphasized that employment practices must provide equal opportunity and cannot unjustly disrupt established employment after a substantial period.
The court emphasized the mandatory nature of the inquiry and decision by the Board as prescribed in Section 64 of the Wakf Act, 1995, and highlighted that the mere existence of an alternative remedy ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of clear guidelines for the appointment of Mutawalli, leading to biased and arbitrary decisions by the Wakf Board, and the intervention of....
The Waqf Board has the power of superintendence over the working of the Scheme and the authority to administer the Scheme, including the power to appoint and remove from the Office of Kalifa.
Point of law: It has also not been held that jurisdiction of High Court, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, is ousted merely on creation of such Tribunals.
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
