IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.Nos.4034 & 4036 of 2026 S.Meeran ..Petitioner Vs

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

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai-1.

3. The Superintendent of Wakf, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Poonamalle Zone No.598, Trunk Road, Poonamalle, Chennai – 56.

..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for records of third respondent dated

10.01.2026 in Proceedings No.Nil and quash the same.

For Petitioner: Mr.M.Nuzhath Khanam For Respondents: Ms.Rajeswari Karthikeyan

ORDER

The writ petition is filed with a prayer to call for the records of the communication of the third respondent dated 10.01.2026 and to quash the same.

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the grievance of the petitioner is that by the impugned communication, the Chief Executive Officer had taken up the task of framing the draft scheme by himself and circulated it among the members inviting objections.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the issue is no longer res integra, having been considered and decided in detail by this Court in Mohamed Yusuf and others vs. Tamil Nadu Waqf Board and others, 12025 (2) LW 927. In the said judgment, it has been categorically held that with reference to the framing of the scheme, it is only the Waqf Board which has the authority and the Waqf Board has to follow the step by step procedure mandated under the Waqf Act, 1995. As per Section 69 of the Waqf Act, 1995, the first step is the satisfaction of the Waqf Board as to the necessity of framing a scheme after conducting an enquiry. Therefore, the first step itself should emanate only from the Waqf Board and an enquiry has to be conducted. If the Chief Executive Officer

himself comes to a conclusion that the scheme is necessary and even comes up with the draft scheme, then the said enquiry becomes a fait accompli and there will not be any proper application of mind as to the necessity at all. Secondly, only after such satisfaction, if the draft is done, wide consultation and consideration of the objections of everyone will be possible. If the draft itself is framed by the Chief Executive Officer, then the objectivity of considering the objections and involving everyone will be lost and therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Waqf Board would submit that considering the imminent necessity of all the Waqfs throughout Tamil Nadu and safeguarding their properties, especially when the records are being digitised, the draft scheme is circulated. The Chief Executive Officer is also empowered under Section 25(1)(c) of the Act to suggest a draft and it is for the Waqf Board to consider. Due opportunity is being given to everyone to submit their objections and it is not as if merely because the draft emanates from the Chief Executive Officer, the persons interested will be precluded from submitting their objections.

5. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6. As laid down by this Court in Mohamed Yusuf and others cited supra, it can be seen that the first step in the framing of the scheme is the satisfaction of the Waqf Board as to the necessity of framing the scheme. Therefore, at that juncture, the question of a draft scheme or its framing by the Chief Executive Officer or by anyone else does not arise. Therefore, without being in any manner influenced by the order impugned in this writ petition, while considering the issue, the Waqf Board shall first decide as to the necessity of framing the sche