The distinction between proceedings under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and suit proceedings under Sections 6 and 7 is crucial in determining the liability to pay court fee.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Syed Aftab Ahmad, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Pankaj Srivastava for respondent No.1.

2. By means of this revision the revisionist has assailed the order dated 28.3.2022 passed by U.P. waqf Tribunal, Lucknow in case No.29 of 2020 (Chief Executive Officer Vs. Mohd. Noor and others) whereby the Tribunal held that the proceedings initiated on the behest of Chief Executive Officer of U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board under Section 45 are akin to suit proceedings and accordingly direction has been given for payment of court fee by the revisionist which has been deficient to the valuation of Rs.3,11,641/-.

3. A complaint was moved by Chief Executive Officer in respect of Waqf Masjid Bande Ali Khan, Lucknow stating therein that the waqf is duly registered in the office of U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow and the property situated at Nawal Kishore Road, Hazratganj, Lucknow of which respondent No.1 who was a tenant in shop No.5 situated on the ground floor of the said property at the monthly rate of Rs.1000/-and he has deposited the payment of rent but he has not paid arrears of rent of Rs.15933 for the period from 1.1.2015 to 28.4.2016. It was stated that the notice had also been given to opposite party No.1 but despite the notice the opposite party has failed to pay the rent including arrears of rent and also to vacate the shop in question and accordingly it is in aforesaid facts that prayer was made to remove the encroachment in respect to the premises in question and proceedings accordingly for eviction of the encroachers for from the premises in question and deliver the vacant possession of the premises to the applicant.

4. The Chief Executive Officer directed an inquiry to be conducted with regard to the allegations made by the petitioner and on the submission of report of the inquiry issued a notice to respondent No.1 directing him to deliver the possession of the property within 15 days to the committee of management appointed by the waqf but the opposite party put in appearance and objected to the claim made by the revisionist. On the basis of the rival submission made before the Chief Executive Officer he moved an application to the waqf Tribunal at Lucknow seeking direction under Section 54(4) of the Waqf Act, 1995 against opposite party No.1 directing him to deliver the possession of the waqf property (shop No.5) to the committee of management.

5. The Tribunal accordingly registered a case and issued notice to the opposite party who put in appearance before the Tribunal and moved an application stating that the application preferred by Chief Executive officer under Section 54 of the Act of 1995 was akin to suit proceedings and as per Rule 3 of the UP. Waqf Tribunal Rules, 2017 and court fee is liable to be paid on such an application. The Tribunal considered the application preferred by respondent No.1 and allowed the same by means of the impugned order dated 28.3.2022 and returned a finding that the application of the Chief Executive Officer is akin to suit for eviction on which as per Section 7 (5) court fee is liable to be paid as per the Court Fee Act, 1870.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the said order has submitted that in the present case application was moved by the Waqf -respondent No.2 i.e. committee of management of respondent No.1 before the Chief Executive Officer under Section 54 of the Act of 1995. According to Section 54 the matter was inquired into and recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer were moved before the Tribunal in the form of application seeking direction for issuance of order of eviction as provided for in under Section 3(4). He submits that the said proceedings have been initiated on an application under Section 54 of the Waqf Act and in sub Section 3 it has been provided that the Chief Executive Officer on his satisfaction that there has been encroachment on the waqf property may move application to the Tribunal for grant of order