IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. BALAJI, J
A.Zafarullah – Appellant
Versus
The Chairman Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Chennai – Respondent
W.P.No.41958 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner requests an extension of the muthawalliship due to inaction. (Para 2) |
| 2. reasons for delays attributed to the constitution of the wakf board. (Para 3) |
| 3. court ordered consideration of representations within a fixed timeframe. (Para 4) |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI W.P.No.41958 of 2025 A.Zafarullah ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Chennai
2.The Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Chennai
3.The Superintendent of Wakf Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Madurai ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents, particularly the 2nd respondent to extend the period of Muthawalliship of the petitioner in respect of Madharasathul Kamariya Wakf, Keeranur Village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District, vide G.S.No.272/MDU, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.10.2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gunasekaran For Respondents : Mr.M.Fakkir Mohideen Standing Counsel for Wakf Board ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Fakkir Mohideen, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents / Wakf Board. With the consent of the counsel on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.
2.The petitioner was appointed as hereditary Muthawalli of Madarasathul Kamariya Wakf, Keeranur Village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. His term was subsequently extended for a period of three years from 26.10.2022 to 25.10.2025. Even before 25.10.2025, the petitioner has submitted representations on 15.05.2025 and 06.10.2025, seeking extension. However, there has been no response to the said representations given by the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has been constrained to file the present Writ Petition.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the delay is only on account of the Board not being constituted and it is functioning with the presence of C.E.O. who is burdened with additional duties. However, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner's representation would be considered on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve (12) weeks.
4.Considering the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 15.05.2025 and 06.10.2025 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
No costs.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.