Parties must seek statutory remedies under the Waqf Act before pursuing matters in High Court when appropriate forums exist.

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioners filed I.A.No.117 of 2025 in O.P.No.114 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala State Waqf Board, seeking an order restraining the respondents, namely, Puthutheruvu Muslim Jama- ath and its President and Secretary, from demolishing the existing mosque and stay of further proceedings on the basis of quotation notice published on 07.03.2025. O.P.No.114 of 2025 was filed challenging the tender proceedings and consequential steps pursuant to the permission granted by the Divisional Waqf Officer, by the order dated 22.10.2024, for the demolition of the existing mosque structure and construction of a new mosque and for recalling the said permission. The grievance of the petitioners is that the mosque of Puthutheruvu Muslim Jama-ath is an ancient mosque having antique and historic value, and that renovation, rather than demolition, would suffice. It was alleged that adequate deliberations were not held in the general body and that, inconsistent versions were placed regarding the cost of construction.

2. By Ext.P7 order dated 20.01.2026, the State Waqf Board dismissed I.A.No.117 of 2025. The last two paragraphs of that order read thus;

“The permission for demolition and reconstruction was granted by the Divisional Waqf Officer in exercise of powers duly delegated to him under the statutory framework. The materials on record show that such permission was granted after due enquiry, verification of documents, site inspection and satisfaction that demolition and reconstruction would be beneficial to the Jama-ath. No illegality, arbitrariness or procedural impropriety is made out so as to warrant interference by this Board at the interlocutory stage. The absence of permission from the local self-governing body at present does not invalidate the sanction granted by the Divisional Waqf Officer.

Considering the age and condition of the mosque, the limitations noted by the expert, the resolutions of the general body, and the lawful exercise of delegated powers by the Divisional Waqf Officer, this Board finds no merit in the prayer to stay the tender proceedings or to restrain demolition. Interference at this stage would be against the long-term interest of the Jama-ath and the Waqf.

Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application stands dismissed.”

3. Seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 order dated

20.01.2026 of the 1^st respondent Kerala State Waqf Board in I.A.No.117 of 2025 in O.P.No.114 of 2025, and also to dispose of Ext.P1 interlocutory application, i.e., I.A.No.117 of 2025, afresh, the petitioners have filed this writ petition, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. On 23.02.2026, when this writ petition came up for admission, while issuing notice on admission by special messenger to respondents 2 to 4, this Court passed the following order;

“One of the contentions raised in this writ petition is that the State Waqf Board passed Ext.P7 order in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, after advancing O.P.No.114 of 2025 from 24.02.2026 to 20.01.2026, suo motu, without notice to the petitioners or their counsel.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for Kerala State Waqf Board takes notice on admission for the 1^st respondent.

3. Issue urgent notice on admission by special messenger to respondents 2 to 4, returnable by 26.02.2026.

4. There will be an interim stay, as prayed for, for a period of three weeks.” (underline supplied)

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala State Waqf Board for the 1^st respond