Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48773
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
RAMSHEED C.H., SHIJAD M, SHAMSHEER, MUHAMMED ASHIK, NAJEER – Appellant
Versus
C.K. ABDUL KHADER HAJI, T. SUBAIR, C.H. ABDUL RASHEED HAJI, ABDUL SALAM K @ SELU, C.H MOHAMMED KUNHI, MUHAMMED SHAFEEQ, SHANEER KOTTIKULAM, ADUKKAM MUHAMMED KUNHI, M.KUNHAMU HAJI, C.K. ABDU SALAM, ABDUL NISAR, MUHAMMED KUNHI C.H, SHAMSUDDIN C.H, T. ABDUL RAHIMAN, MUSTHAFA, ABDUL SALAM HAJI RAMARAM, K. MOIDU HAJI, ABDURRAHIMAN.K, ABDUL KAREEM, KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD, DIVISIONAL WAQF OFFICER KANNUR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 40837 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.M.FIROZ, SMT.M.SHAJNA, SHRI.JAMEEL AHAMMED, M.S., SHRI.A AL FAYAD
For the Respondents: V P NARAYANAN
Judicial review does not preclude statutory remedies under the Unified Waqf Management Act regarding waqf disputes.
Headnote:The judgment analyzes the provisions under Section 32 of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995, where the petitioners sought reliefs to challenge the order of the Kerala State Waqf Board dated 28.10.2025 regarding election conduct. The court found the writ petition maintainable but directed the petitioners to pursue statutory remedies under Section 83(2) of the Act. The fundamental issues discussed include the legality of the appointment of a Returning Officer and the voters list. The court stated, 'if the petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P3 order... they have to invoke the statutory remedy.' The petition was dismissed, maintaining the right for statutory appeal.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relief sought by members of waqf (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. hearing of the petition (Para 3) |
| 3. statutory remedies must be pursued (Para 4) |
| 4. writ petition dismissed (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioners, who are stated to be the members of the general body of Neeleswaram Tarbiatul Islam Sabha, which is a Waqf registered under the 20th respondent Kerala State Waqf Board, have filed this writ petition invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs;
“i. To call for records leading to and pursuant to Exhibits P1, P2 and P3 and to quash Exhibit P3 to the extent as it is against the petitioners and to the extent it declined the prayers of the petitioners by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ.
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 20th respondent Waqf Board to appoint an independent Advocate Commissioner as Returning Officer to conduct a free and fair election to the Working Committee of Neeleswaram Tharbiyathul Islam Sabha for the 2025-2027 term.
iii. To direct the Respondent No 20 or the duly appointed returning officer to Include family members of the second petitioner and similarly situated persons in the subject matter voters list by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.
iv. To declare that the appointment of the 19th respondent as Returning Officer is illegal and vitiated by conflict of interest, and to set aside the same.
v. To declare that the draft voters list prepared by the 19th respondent is illegal, arbitrary, and vitiated by bias and conflict of interest, and therefore liable to be set aside.
vi. to issue a direction deferring the conduct of the election to the Working Committee of Neeleswaram Tharbiyathul Islam Sabha until a new independent Advocate Commissioner is appointed and a proper voters list is prepared after conducting a fair and comprehensive census of all residents of the Mahallu.”
2. The main relief sought for in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 order dated 28.10.2025 of the Kerala State Waqf Board in I.A.No.437 of 2025 in O.P.No.661 of 2025. The original petition was by the petitioners before the State Waqf Board, invoking the provisions under Section 32 of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995 . Ext.P3 order dated 28.10.2025 of the State Waqf Board in I.A.No.437 of 2025 reads thus:
“R2 appeared in Person. R14 Advocate V.P Narayanan offered Vakalath. R19 Returning officer is directed to publish addendum voters list incorporating the name namely Ramsheed, Shijad, Shamsheer, Muhammed Ashik, Najeer who are petitioners in the OP as they have included and participated in the last election and permit to exercise all rights as voters including contesting the election.
Divisional Waqf Officer, Kannur is directed to appoint an observer to observe the election.”
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Waqf Board for the respondents 20 and 21.
4. As already noticed hereinbefore, the main relief sought for in this writ petition is a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 order dated 28.10.2025 of the Kerala State Waqf Board. In view of the provisions contained in Section 83 (2) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995 , any mutawalli, person interested in a waqf or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act, or rules made thereunder, may make an application within the time specified in this Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed, to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the waqf. As per the proviso to Section 83 (2), if there is no Tribunal or the Tribunal is not functioning, any aggrieved person may appeal to the High Court directly.
5. In view of the statutory remedy provided under Section 8
