Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VIVEK AGARWAL
Ahsan Ansari – Appellant
Versus
Waqf Mahal Umrao Begum Sahiba – Respondent
ORDER :
These petitions are filed by the petitioners being aggrieved of the order dated 25.02.2014 contained in Annexure P-10 in writ petition No.4542/2014 (Ehsan Ansari v. Waqf Mahal and Others) which is taken as a reference case for the purpose of referring the facts and annexures.
Petitioner's case is that on 29.12.2010, the Chief Executive Officer who was holding the post at the relevant time, after hearing the parties had reserved the case for passing orders. No orders were passed till 08.07.2013 when new incumbent to the post of Chief Executive Officer without hearing the rival parties and putting them to notice, decided the case on that day i.e. 08.07.2013 vide Annexure P-4.
It is submitted that thereafter when third Chief Executive Officer joined then on 30.09.2013 he decided that he has jurisdiction to take up the order of previous Chief Executive Officer dated 08.07.2013 in review, and passed order dated 30.09.2013 as contained in Annexure P-6. Thereafter final order on review was passed on 31.10.2013 as contained in Annexure P-7.
Petitioner's contention is that power of review is vested in the Chief Executive Officer in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 35 of the Mad
The Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf lacks inherent power to review decisions; such unauthorized orders are nullities.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board lacks inherent power to review its own orders; disputes must be addressed by the Waqf Tribunal as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board lacks inherent power to review its own orders, and disputes must be addressed before the Waqf Tribunal as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
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.
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 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 Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board cannot delegate authority to exhibit documents to unauthorized individuals, as such powers are exclusively held by the Board under the Waqf Act.
Wakf Property – Eviction of tenant - under Section 83(1), the Tribunal had no power to entertain a suit of eviction.
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.
The Chief Executive Officer cannot independently order eviction of encroachers post-enquiry under the Waqf Act, necessitating a tribunal application for eviction.
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
