ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 21.04.2022 passed by Waqf Election Tribunal, Karnataka State Board of Auqaf, No.6, Cunningham Road, Bengaluru, by which the election petition filed by the petitioners has been dismissed as devoid of merits.

2. The elections put in question pertains to a Waqf institution known and called as Masjid and Dargah Hazrath, Kambal Posh, HKP Road, Shivajinagar, Bengaluru, which is a registered Waqf institution, governed under the provision of Waqf Act. The elections that are called in question were conducted to the Managing Committee of the said Waqf institution on

26.12.2021.

3. Though several grounds are urged in the memorandum of petition, learned counsel for the petitioners makes his submission on two principle grounds, firstly that the Election Committee had deliberately left out. The areas of Cock Burn Road, Slaughter House 'A' Street and Cornel Hill Road which form integral part of areas coming within the jurisdiction of the aforesaid Waqf institution. That since these three areas have not been included, the voters residing in these areas have been left out. As such the preparation of the voters' list itself is defective and illegal going to the very route of the matter, vitiating the entire election process.

4. The second ground urged is with regard to Section 26 of the Scheme of Management pertaining to subject Waqf institution providing for disqualification of the candidates. In that, it is alleged that persons who are permitted to contest the elections were the members of earlier Managing Committee constituted in the election held during 2006 which was superseded by the respondent - Waqf Board and the allegations of financial irregularities. By virtue of which, they had become ineligible/disqualified in view of provisions of Section 26 of the Scheme of the Management. That the Tribunal without even recording any evidence to this aspect of the matter, had by making passing remark disallowed the said ground. Thus, he submits that the order passed by the Tribunal suffers from perversity, arbitrariness, requiring intervention at the hands of this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bar Council of Delhi and others v. Surjeet Singh and others reported in (1980) 4 SCC 211, to buttress his submission regarding preparation of voters' list being defective, defeating the very process of election.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 - Committee justifying the order passed by the Tribunal submits that the very document enclosed by the petitioners namely, the voter's list which was notified by the Election Committee of the Waqf institution includes the names and details of the voters' list pertaining to the aforesaid three areas namely Cock Burn Road, Slaughter House 'A' Street and Cornel Hill Road and this aspect of the matter has been taken note of by the Tribunal.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 further submits that the petitioners not having questioned the preparation of the voters' list by filing objections when it was published, have no locus standi to question the election process on the said ground. He also submits that no other voters from these three areas have filed any objection, as such the present petition is filed only with a malafide intention by a person having no locus standi. 8. As regards the contention of members of the present committee being disqualified in view of their earlier committee having been superseded, learned counsel draws attention of this Court to the order dated 09.04.2015 and submits that super-session was not on account of irregularities but on account of required members not being there in view of their resignations.

9. Further, learned counsel for respondent No.5 -

Committee submits that there has been no material evidence placed with regard to any allegation of financial irregularities committed by the members and in the a