Eviction under the Waqf Act must proceed through civil suits, not via applications due to statutory provisions.

Anil K. Narendran, J.

This civil revision petition filed under Section 83 (9) of the Waqf Act , 1995, arises out of the order dated 24.10.2014 of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode, in O.A.No.20 of 2013, which was one filed invoking the provisions under (2) of the said Act challenging proceedings No.E4-2128/12-1 dated 27.08.2013 of the Chief Executive Officer, Kerala State Wakf Board. Paragraphs

13 and 14 and also the last paragraph of that order read thus;

“13. It can be seen that Sec.54 of the Wakf Act 1995 give ample powers of the chief executive officer to remove encroachment with respect to a wakf property and the term encroachment includes the continuance in occupation by any person of the Wakf property after the authority whether by way of grant or had been determined for any reason whatsoever. In this case the records reveal that respondent No.1 of this OA who is the petitioner before the Chief Executive Officer had produced copy of the tenancy termination notice issued to the respondent therein u/s.106 of ' Transfer of Properties Act . It is clearly mentioned in that order that as far as buildings owned by Wakfs are concerned, the law applicable is Wakf Act 1995 and those buildings are exempted from the purview of (Buildings) Lease and Rent Control Act. In spite of notice of termination of tenancy the respondent had not vacated the premises of the wakf. So the chief Executive officer satisfied that the respondent is occupying the building without any backing of law. Such occupation is prohibited under sec.56 of the Wakf Act 1995. Since the 1^st respondent therein is coming under the definitions encroacher as defined under 2(ha) of the Kerala Wakf Board Rules 1996 and held that the chief executive officer of the Board is empowered to deal with matter and basing on Sec.54 of the Wakf Act ordered to remove the encroachment.

14. As far as sec. 54 of the Wakf Act 1995 is concerned it is a special section which, in fact, override the general provisions of Sec.83 of the Act. The argument of the applicant herein that on delivering the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramesh Govindarao cited above the sec.54 of the Wakf Act is redundant will not sustain. This being an order of 1995 Act before coming into force of the amended enactment. Sec.54 is clearly applicable and sub-section 4 of the Section is attracted here and suit alone will sustain in this matter, not an application. But proviso to sub-section is very clear "provided that no such suit shall be instituted by a person who has been let into possession of the land, building, space or other property as lessee, licensee or mortgagee by the muthawalli of the wakf or by any other person authorised by him in this behalf. So it is clear that any person aggrieved by the order of the Chief Executive Officer under Section 54 can file only a suit before the Tribunal, that too except by the tenant, lessee or the mortgagee. On that ground also this petition filed by the tenant is not maintainable. Though the parties were given chance to adduce evidence both sides have not adduced any evidence at all. The points are answered accordingly.

Hence this application is dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case there is no order as to cost.”

2. On 18.12.2014, when this civil revision petition came up for admission, the matter was admitted on file. Urgent notice was ordered to the 1^st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Wakf Board took notice for respondents 2 and 3. In I.A.No.3167 of 2014, this Court granted an interim order, which reads thus;

“Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the