SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(All) 2867

[2011(10) ADJ 801]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
S.S. CHAUHAN, J.
SHIA CENTRAL BOARD OF WAQFS AND ANOTHER .....Revisionists
Versus
DARGAH HAZRAT ABBAS (AS) AND OTHERS .....Opposite Parties
(Civil Revision No. 6 of 1994, decided on 20th October, 2011)

Advocates:
N.C. Chaturvedi for the Revisionists; Pankaj Naqvi for the Opposite Parties.

Headnote:U.P. Muslim Waqf Act, 1960—Sections 29(8) and 3(12)—Management of Shrine—Income from—Dispute as to sharing of—Trial Court by impugned judgment dated 6.1.1992 came to conclusion that property in question was a personal property and cannot be termed as Waqf property and hence set aside impugned orders passed by Board dated 14.11.1978 and 30-11-1978—Challenge against—Long user of property for religious and charitable purpose goes to indicate that it is a waqf property—Section 29 of Act liberty to parties to come forward to make an application for registering the property as Waqf property—No such evidence has been adduced even before the Tribunal to indicate that it was a personal property and not the waqf property—Impugned order passed by Civil Judge dated 6.10.1992 set aside and order of Board maintained. [Paras 8 to19]

       

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble S.S. Chauhan, J.—The present proceedings arose on a reference being made under Section 29 (8) of the U.P. Muslim Waqf Act, 1960 (hereinafter refereed to as the ‘Act’).

2. The facts giving rise to the present dispute are that the building of Dargah Hazrat Abbas (hereinafter refereed to as the ‘shrine’) was constructed by Nawab Saadat Ali Khan in the year 1800. This building was constructed at the place where Saint Mirza Faqira used to reside and the building in question came up in the form of shrine. The followers/worshipers started making prayer there and also making offerings on the said shrine. It is stated that the said shrine was managed by the successors of Saint Mirza Faqira. Later on, it is alleged that Nawab Wajid Ali Shah bifurcated the income of the shrine into two parts and the income which was derived from the offerings made by male worshipers were to go to the treasury of the Nawabs and the offerings which were received from the female worshipers were to go to the family members of the successors of the Saint Mirza Faqira. During the regime of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah a Government Order (Shahi Farman) was issued, according to which the management of the income of the shrine was handed over to Nawab Hasan Ali Khan and where-after the shrine is being managed and the income is being managed by the successors of Nawab Hasan Ali Khan. It also provided in the said Government Order (Shahi Farman) that except Nawab Hasan Ali Khan and his descendants, no other person shall have a right in the income received from the offerings of the shrine. In the year 1931 there was some dispute between the descendants of the Nawab Hasan Ali Khan in regard to the income of the shrine and the matter was referred to the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator had made the award Rule of the Court. In the said award, it was held that the shrine is not a waqf property and is a personal property. The said award was passed on the basis of the consent of the parties, but a committee of five members was constituted to look after the management of the shrine and it was decided that the income shall go to the successors of Nawab Hasan Ali Khan and the same will be distributed amongst them and one share was to be spent in the maintenance of the shrine. Thereafter, the said committee continuously managed the affairs of the shrine as well as the income derived from the shrine. Later on, Sri Syed Ali Zaheer was appointed as president of the U.P. Shia Central Board of Waqf (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Board’) by means of Government Notification dated 27.11.1978. The Controller of the Board at the relevant time was Sri S.A.H. Rizvi and he wrote a letter on 9.5.1978 to Sri Syed Ali Zaheer making a request therein that the shrine be registered as a waqf. The said letter was replied on 15.6.1978 wherein it was asked as to under which provision of the Act he wanted to get the shrine registered. A reply was given to the aforesaid letter on 19.7.1978. Thereafter, on 29.7.1978 the Secretary of the shrine wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Board asking therein for certain time as it was said that he was searching for the relevant judicial documents and, therefore, it was not possible for him to submit reply by 31.7.1978. The Secretary of the shrine again wrote a letter on 28.10.1978 to the Secretary of the Board and demanded for one months’ additional time for filing reply. During all this letter writing, on 15.11.1978 the Secretary of the Bord informed the committee of the shrine that the shrine has been registered as a waqf. The Secretary of the shrine wrote a letter on 22.11.1978 that the action of the Board was illegal as no application under Section 29 of the Act has been given for registering the shrine as waqf. It was also stated in the said letter that the committee was not given proper opportunity of hearing and neither they were given opportunity to adduce evidence in this regard. The Administrator appointed by means of order dated 30.11.1978



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top