Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 447
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J
RAJA AHMED S/O BASHA SAHEB AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 29976 OF 2016 (GM-WAKF)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.S.Halalli
For the Respondents: G.B.Yadav, P.S.Malipatil, Mohd. Khader Khan
Ownership of land granted via a tribunal supersedes subsequent claims of Waqf based on improper gazetted notifications without following statutory provisions.
Headnote:(A) Waqf Act, 1995 - Section 54 - Land Reforms Act - Gazetted notification under Waqf Act asserted ownership of Waqf Board over the land. Petitioners claimed occupancy rights granted by Land Tribunal in 1987. The court found the Waqf Board's claims illegal due to the land vesting with the State in 1974. The notification lacked validity since the Waqf Board did not comply with required procedures for declaring land as Waqf property. (Paras 15, 21, 29)
(B) Jurisdiction - The court ruled unauthorized actions by Waqf Board are invalid. A grant of occupancy rights under Land Reforms Act supersedes later claims of Waqf ownership. (Paras 19, 30)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners were granted occupancy rights in 1987 by the Land Tribunal for specific lands, contested by the Waqf Board based on a 1974 gazetted notification claiming the property as Waqf. Court examined claims of prior occupancy rights vis-à-vis the Waqf Board's assertion.
Findings of Court:
The court quashed the Waqf Board's order, reinforcing the petitioners' occupancy rights and instructed reversal of mutation entries to reflect petitioners' ownership.
Issues: The court addressed issues of jurisdiction, validity of the gazette notification, and principles of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: Land vested with the State cannot be claimed by the Waqf Board post-vesting and the gazette notification's authority was questioned due to improper procedure. Historical context and judgments established precedence for petitioners' rights.
Result: Writ petition allowed; impugned order quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land tribunal granted occupancy rights. (Para 2 , 16 , 17) |
| 2. petitioner's rights based on prior tribunal decisions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court analysis of jurisdiction and property rights. (Para 15 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 28) |
| 4. arguments against waqf authority's claims. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 5. subsequent findings affirm original rights to property. (Para 27 , 29) |
ORDER
Heard learned counsel, Sri S.S. Halalli, for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3/State, learned counsel, Sri P.S.Malipatil for respondent No.4 and learned counsel, Sri Mohd. Khader Khan for respondent No.5.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that the Land Tribunal, Afzalpur granted occupancy rights vide order dated 13.08.1987 in respect of lands bearing Sy.Nos.174, 175 and 176 measuring 21 acres 05 guntas, 15 acres 04 guntas and 31 acres 28 guntas respectively situated at Jewargi to the petitioners. The Land Tribunal order is produced at Annexure–B. Pursuant to the said order, Form No.II was issued and thereafter, the mutations were effected in the name of petitioners in the year 1987-88.
This is reflected in the RTC in the name of the petitioners.
3. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that prior to the grant order made by the Land Tribunal, the name of Waqf was not shown in any records except the gazette notification alleged to have been published on 20.06.1974. It is further case of the petitioners that the Karnataka Board of Waqf instituted an enquiry under Section 54 of the Karnataka Waqf Act, 1995 and passed an order on 23.01.2016 without adverting to the objections raised by the petitioners and respondent no.4 by letter dated 08.07.2008 directed the Tahsildar to effect mutation in Sy.No.174, 175 and 176 in the name of Waqf and for execution of the eviction order holding that the petitioners are encroachers. Pursuant to the order, the Tahsildar effected the mutation in the name of the Waqf by mutation dated 29.10.2010 by removing the name of the petitioners and incorporating the name of the Waqf Board. Later, in pursuance to the order of the Hon'ble High Court in identical case i.e., W.P.No.81503/2011 dated 21.04.2011, the Tasildar after issuance of notice to the Waqf Board and the petitioner and after hearing both sides, passed an order on 13.03.2013 in light of grant of occupancy rights by the Land Tribunal, effected the mutation in the name of petitioners on 29.10.2010. This order of the Tahsildar came to be confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 29.11.2013. It is the case of the petitioners that the Assistant Commissioner, Kalaburagi is the Chairman of the Land Tribunal and the Tahsildar is the Secretary and therefore, both are aware about the order passed by the Land Tribunal in favour of the original tenant/inamdar and all the records of Land Tribunal such as the order of the Land Tribunal and certificate of the land tenancy are very much available with these two authorities and despite knowing the fact that the Waqf Board has no right in view of the grant of occupancy rights have not considered these issues and have changed the mutation entry in favour of the Waqf. The petitioners herein being aggrieved by the order of respondent No.4-Waqf Board and the order of the Tahsildar changing the mutation entry in the name of the Waqf Board by mutation entry dated 29.01.2010 is before this Court.
4. It is the vociferous contention of the learned counsel, Sri S.S. Halalli appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the right of the properties bearing Sy.Nos.174, 175 and 176 have been settled by way of order passed by the Land Tribunal dated 13.08.1987 and that in a similar identical case of the Waqf Board in W.P.No.13733/2007 (LR) which was filed by the Waqf Board came to be rejected and the same was taken up in an appeal in Writ Appeal No.117/2008 by respondent No.4-Waqf Board which also came to be dismissed by affirming the or
