SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67371

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J
Hazreth Syed Musthafa Darood – Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Waqf Board – Respondent
WMP (MD) No.18736 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.H.Jasima Yasmin for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For the Respondents:Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan for R1 and R2, Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate for R3 & R4

Compensation related to Waqf property must be paid to the Waqf, not the Board, pending the new committee's establishment.

Headnote:The judgment concerns the legality of a compensation order directing payment to the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board instead of the Waqf itself, claiming injury to rights under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner contended for direct compensation to the Waqf, while the Waqf Board argued competency issues. The court resolved that compensation should await the establishment of a new Waqf committee, nullifying the previous payment direction. The final directive states the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board must remit the compensation to the Waqf upon the organization of the new committee.

Table of Content
1. challenge to compensation order concerning waqf property (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding locus standi and payment recipients (Para 3 , 4)
3. final directive on compensation payment contingent on new committee establishment (Para 5)

O R D E R

An order dated 18.07.2025 of the District Collector is challenged in this writ petition insofar as it directs the payment of compensation to the account of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, Chennai.

2. The principal contention of the petitioner is that the property was owned by the Waqf. Consequently, it is submitted that compensation should be paid to the Waqf and not to the Waqf Board.

3. Learned counsel for the Waqf Board submits that the term of the present committee, including the Secretary/Hazreth Syed Musthafa Darood, expired on 22.01.2025. Therefore, he submits that the petitioner does not have the locus standi to canvass the case on behalf of the Waqf. He also relies upon paragraph 13 of the counter-affidavit to state that the Waqf Board would receive the compensation on behalf of the Waqf and make disbursements to the Waqf upon application by the Waqf.

4. In response to a question as to whether the money would be remitted to the account of the Waqf once the new committee is in place, after getting instructions, learned counsel for the Waqf Board replied in the affirmative.

5. Considering the fact that the term of the present committee, including the secretary, expired in January 2025, it is appropriate that the amount be remitted once the new committee is in place. Therefore, by recording and accepting the statement made on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board to make the remittance to the account of the Waqf once the new committee of the Waqf is in place. To that extent, the impugned order directing remittance of the compensation to the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board is set aside. It is needless to say that the earlier direction restraining the Waqf Board from utilizing the said amount shall continue to operate until the remittance to the Waqf. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top