Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 1424
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Syed Mazhar Hussain - Petitioner
Versus
The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Chennai 1 and Ors. – Respondents
CRP. Nos.2073, 2074, 2080 & 2293 of 2024 and CMP. Nos.11108, 11109, 11132 of 2024
Decided On : 08-01-2025
Advocates Appeared :
For the Petitioner : M/s. N.A.Nissar Ahmed, Senior Counsel M/s. Kowser Sulthana I.
For the Respondents : Mr. P. Sanjay Prasad, S. Jerald Lenin For Caveator, P. Vincy Rani For Caveator, T. Saikrishnan, Mrs. Hema Sampath, Senior Counsel for Mr. A. Masood Ahmed, Mr. A. Muthukumar, Mr. V. Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for Mr. Y. Kaja Navas.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : N.A.Nissar Ahmed, Senior Counsel M/s.KOWSER SULTHANA I
For the Respondent: Mr.P.Sanjay Prasad for R13 S.JERALD LENIN FOR CAVEATOR R20 P.VINCY RANI FOR CAVEATOR R15 T. SAIKRISHNAN FOR R1 Mrs.Hema Sampath, Senior Counsel for Mr.A.Masood Ahmed for R6 & R10 Mr.A.Muthukumar for R7, 8 and 12 Mr.V.Raghavachari,Senior Counsel for Mr.Y.Kaja Navas for R14 & 17
Elections conducted under waqf bye-laws must adhere strictly to established rules, and issues of descendant status cannot be revisited after long-standing acceptance.
Headnote:(A) Waqf Act, 1995 - Sections 83(1) and (2) - Election disputes - The court reviewed the validity of elections conducted under the bye-laws of a waqf, determining that the elections were not conducted in accordance with the established rules and thus declared the proceedings null and void - The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the bye-laws and the long-standing practices established by the waqf - The court clarified that the issue of descendants, previously settled, cannot be reopened after decades of accepted practice and that future elections must adhere to the bye-laws established in 2010. (Paras 4, 6, 27, 28)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the elections conducted by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, arguing that the elections violated bye-laws and included non-descendants of the waqf founder. The tribunal initially ruled the elections null and void, leading to the current appeal.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the elections were improperly conducted and that the question of descendant status should not be revisited after long acceptance.
Issues: The main issues included whether the elections were conducted in accordance with the bye-laws and the legitimacy of re-examining the descendant status of certain parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the elections were invalid due to non-compliance with bye-laws and that the descendants' status, having been long accepted, could not be challenged at this late stage.
Result: The tribunal's findings were set aside, affirming the need for adherence to the bye-laws for future elections.
ORDER :
(N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
Challenging the orders passed by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Tribunal, Chennai dated 25.04.2024 made in O.A.Nos.31, 79, 79 & 79 of 2022, the present revisions have been filed.
2. O.A.No.79 of 2022 has been filed under Section 83 (1) and (2) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended in 2013) seeking for a declaration, to declare that the election as conducted by the 2nd respondent dated 03.10.2021 and the subsequent proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 08.10.2021 and 12.10.2021 in electing the applicants 1 to 4 and the respondents 3 to 12 as null and void, illegal and contrary to the by-laws of the Dadasha Makkan Waqf and set aside the same; to declare that the selection of 5th respondent dated 03.10.2021 is null and void and contrary to the by-laws of the waqf on the ground that he is not eligible to participate in the election since he is not a descendant of Dadasha as per clause 11 of the by-laws of the waqf and set aside the same; to declare that the selection of office bearers/applicants 1 to 4 and the respondents 3 to 12 dated 22.10.2021 as conducted by the 2nd respondent at the office of the Superintendent of Waqf, Ice house, Chennai is null and void, illegal and contrary to the by-laws of the Dadasha Makkan Waqf and set aside the same.
3. O.A.No.31 of 2022 has been filed under Section 83 (1) and (2) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (as amended in 2013) to set aside the order of the 1st respondent dated 03.12.2021 in Proc.No.619/99/B9/Chen and the resolution of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board dated 28.10.2021 as null and void
4. Background of the case in O.A.No.79 of 2022 are as follows:
4.a.The Dadasha Makkan Waqf is a registered and notified waqf governed by the scheme framed by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board. As per the proforma of the waqf, the rule of succession of the mutawalli is hereditary from the descendants of saint Dadasha as per the waqf deed. The learned City Civil Court Madras in O.S.No.75 of 1909 dated 21.02.1910 framed the scheme decree that the office of the mutawalli is by rotation from among the descendants of six sons and two daughters of the saint Dadasha. The plaintiff and the defendants in O.S.No.75 of 1909 are the only descendants of saint Dadasha. A scheme was framed in the said suit for the administration of the waqf, according to which each branch of the descendants of Dadasha should manage the waqf for 1 year. However the scheme was not implemented because it was not possible to manage the waqf for 1 year by each branch in rotation. Therefore the Bye laws of the waqf were framed by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board on 15.07.2010. The saint Dadasha had six sons and two daughters. The daughters of the saint got half shares. Hence there are seven branches consisting from the six sons and two daughters of the saint. As per clauses 9, 11 and 12 of the by-laws each branch has to select two members to the execution committee. The elected 14 members have to select the office bearers in the presence of the Waqf Board officials with the prior permission from the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board.
4.b.The Waqf Board directed the Election Officer to conduct the election only on 03.10.2021 and as per the bye-laws two members were selected from their respective branch. The Election Officer assumed and took an illegal view that, he has to select 14 members from seven branches as per clause 12 of the bye-laws and thereby has violated the clause 9 of the bye-laws, since clause 12 speaks only about, "the appointment of the committee" only after selection of 14 members from 7 branches by the descendants of Dadasha under clause 9. Contrary to the bye-laws he selected 14 members and passed a proceedings dated 08.10.2021 and 12.10.2021 without any prior permission of the Waqf Board. It was contended that he has conducted the election beyond the period of one day which is absolutely illegal and further, has violated the majority decision from the branches 1, 3, 5 and 6 thereby defeated the rights of the 79 descendants from the respective branch.
