This

contempt

petition

is

filed

for

initiating

proceedings for contempt against accused/respondents for

their willful, deliberate, wanton disobedience of order

dated 17.03.2022 passed in W.P.No.200636/2022 vide

Annexure-B.

02.

The Karnataka State Board of Auqaf, passed an

order

dated

17.01.2020

appointing

respondent

No.2/accused No.2 as a Mutawalli for the management of

the Dargah Hazarat Soofi Sarmash (Sunni), (RH) of

Badasagar village, Tq: Shahapur, Dist: Yadgiri, for a

period of 03 years or until further order, whichever is

earlier, with certain conditions. The said order was

challenged

by

the

complainant

herein

by

filing

W.P.No.200636/2022. An interim order was passed on

17.03.2022, staying the operation and execution of the

order dated 17.01.2020 passed by respondent No.2

therein. An application filed by respondents No.2 and 3 in

I.A.No.1/2022 for vacating of the said interim order, came

- 4 -

to be dismissed, vide order dated 15.06.2022. Such being

the case, the complainant has come up with this contempt

petition alleging violation of the interim order passed by

this Court in W.P.No.200636/2022.

03.

We have heard the learned counsel for

respective parties, before framing of charge and perused

the entire material placed on record.

04.

It is alleged by the complainant that in spite of

the interim order passed by this Court, staying the

operation and execution of the order dated 17.01.2020

and the said interim order having attained its finality,

since I.A.No.1/2022 filed for vacating stay was also

dismissed, respondent No.2/accused herein has still

claimed Mutawalliship and carried certain activities in

connection with the Dargah and therefore, he has willfully

disobeyed the order passed by this Court. It is stated that

the complainant has brought to the notice of other

respondents regarding violation of the interim order, but

they failed to prevent such violation.

- 5 -

05.

The learned counsel appearing for complainant

would contend that respondent No.2 herein is not a

member of a family belonging to Walid and only members

of the family are eligible to be appointed as a Mutawalli as

can be seen from the Muntakab and he is a stranger and

thus not eligible to be appointed as a Mutawalli, whereas

the petitioner is from the family of the Wakif and he is

eligible to act as a Mutawalli for the Dargah and to

conduct all ceremonies connected with the Dargah. It is

stated that, by virtue of interim order of stay granted by

this Court, respondent No.2 herein seizes to be a

Mutawalli of the subject Dargah and he could not have

acted and discharged the duties of a Mutawalli and he had

no rights to interfere in the religious activities of the

Dargah. However, respondent No.2 along with his

followers in violation of the Court order, claiming to be a

Mutawalli of the Dargah performed religious activities. It

is contended that, he has installed name board near the

Dargah written in Urdu, declaring that he is a Mutawalli

and entitled to receive the donations for the upcoming fair

- 6 -

and devotees of the DargHa have offered donations to

him believing that he is still a Mutawalli. Further he has

also constructed an arch nearby Dargha and misused the

amount in the undees.

06.

Respondent No.2 / accused No.2 has filed an

affidavit totally denying the allegations made against him.

It is stated that he has not performed any of the functions

as per the order dated 17.01.2020 appointing him as a

Mutawalli, which was stayed by this Court and therefore,

there is no violation of the interim order as alleged by the

complainant. He has further stated in the affidavit that he

has not carried any activities in connection with the said

Dargah as a Mutawalli, in violation of the order passed by

this Court.

07.

Respondent No.1, Chief Executive Officer,

Karnataka State Board of Wakf has filed an affidavit dated

29.10.2022 stating that, last 2-3 years, the Sandal urs is

being performed in the Dargah by Accused No.2, herein

as Sajjadanashin. Fo