IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on:25.11.2025 Pronounced on:05.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI W.P. No.43250 of 2025 and WMP. No.48436 of 2025 Fathima Rafiq Petitioner(s)

Vs The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, No.1, Jaffer Syrang Street, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai-1.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records of the respondent vide proceedings dated 19.01.2024 in Se.Mu.Order 13513/09/B7/Ve in so far as restricting the tenure of the petitioner till

24.08.2025 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.A.Nassir Hussain For Respondent : Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, Standing Counsel **********

ORDER

The Writ Petitioner seeks issuance of Writ of Certiorari, challenging the proceedings of the respondent dated 19.01.2024, insofar as restricting the tenure of the petitioner till 24.08.2025 and quash the same.

2.I have heard Mr.N.A.Nassir Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Board.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Syed Noor Ahmed Sha Kadri Dargah at Katpadi Road, Vellore is a registered and notified Waqf under the supervisory control of the Waqf Board. The rule of succession for the said Waqf is hereditary as substantiated through the proforma and records maintained even by the respondent/Board. After the demise of the petitioner’s father Abdullah Basha, who was the hereditary trustee till 1987, his mother Begam Bee was discharging duties of Muthawalli till her demise on 05.07.2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further state that after the demise of the petitioner’s mother, Begum Bee, the petitioner was recognized as the hereditary trustee by the respondent, by it proceedings dated 25.08.2022 along with his sister Habeeba Bee.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Board has erroneously restricted the tenure of the hereditary muthawalliship for a period of three years which expired on 24.08.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there can be no restriction of the tenure of the hereditary muthawalli and it is against the provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995. It is also the case of the petitioner that his sister was guilty of misappropriation and mismanagement and she was removed from muthawalliship under Section 64 of the Waqf Act by the respondent on 19.01.2024. The petitioner challenges the restriction of the tenure of the hereditary muthawalliship till 24.08.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the following decisions:

(i) Mohammed Sulthan Sheriff Vs. The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, in W.P. No.22496 of 2024 dated 27.08.2024;

and (ii) Apsar Peeran Shuttari Saheballa Vs. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Rep by its Chief Executive Officer, in W.P. No.19032 of 2023 dated 23.08.2023.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Board Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, would submit that the petitioner has approached the Court belatedly and is not entitled to any relief, despite the tenure having ended in August 2025. The learned Standing Counsel would submit that the petitioner has filed the writ petition only in October 2025 and as on date, the petitioner does not hold the office of muthawalli and therefore, the petitioner cannot maintain the writ petition and his remedy is only to invoke proceedings under Section 83 of the Waqf Act. The learned Senior Counsel also relies on the following decisions:

(i) Syed Ansaruddin Vs. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board by its Secretary and 6 others, reported in 1992 (2) L.W. 685;

(ii) Board of Wakf, West Bengal and another Vs. Anis Fatma Begum and another, reported in (2010) 14 SCC 588; and (iii) S.V.Cheriyakoya Thangal Vs. S.V.P.Pookoya and others, reported in (2024) SCC Online SC 1586.

6. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitio