IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-02-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY AND W.M.P.No.7163 of 2026, W.M.P.No.7165 of 2026 P.M.Doulath Basha S/o.Abdul Majeed, Sunnath Jamath Jamiya Masjid @

pennagaram Masjid, Dharmapuri Main Road, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri 636 810.

... Petitioners Vs.

1. The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board Rep by its Chairman, No.1 Jaffer Syrang Stret, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai 600 001.

2.The Chief Executive officer Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, No.1 Jaffer Syrang Stret, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai 600 001.

3.R.Mohamed Kamal Batcha No.170 Majeed street, Mulluvadi, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri 636 810.

4.M. Mohamed Ismail, S/o.R. Mohamaed Kamal Batcha, No.170 Majeed Street, Mulluvadi, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri 636 810. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling upon the records of the 1^st respondent in resolution item No.185/24 vide Na.Ka.No.38115/24/AA2/Dharmapuri, dated 22.08.2025 and consequential order passed by the 2^nd respondent in Se.Mu.order No.38115/24/AA2/Dharmapuri, dated 31.01.2026 and thereby quash the same as illegal and unjust and pass.

For Petitioner: Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam, Senior Counsel, for A.Ajimath Begum For Respondents: Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, for R1 & R2

O R D E R

The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned Resolution item No.185/24 dated 22.08.2025 and the consequential proceedings dated

31.01.2026.

2. By Resolution dated 22.08.2025, the respondents 3 and 4 were appointed as the Hereditary Mutawalli and the 4^th respondent was appointed as Joint Hereditary Mutawalli.

3. Upon hearing the Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the grievance of the petitioner is that the Waqf was established both by the contributions of the inamdars and also the jamathars. As per the proforma, the rule of succession is hereditary as per the custom and usage. As per the custom, even at the time of successions, it was found that there are 250 Muslim families in the village and almost all of them are descendants of the original inamdars. In that view of the matter, as per custom, periodically Mutawallis have been selected by the jamathars. While so, for the first time, the respondents 3 and 4 are recognised as Hereditary Mutawalli. The same goes directly against the proforma. Even the impugned resolution of the Waqf Board itself recognises the earlier customs and usage that only the jamathars selected the Mutawalli. Therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be interfered with by this Court.

4. When the matter came up for admission, Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, Learned Counsel taking notice on behalf the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, would submit that the question that is to be decided in this case is that what is the rule of succession of the office of the Mutawalli. Column No.9 categorically says that it is hereditary, as per the custom and usage. Going by the same, the resolution has been passed and the respondents 3 and 4 have been duly selected. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Waqf Board, they are entitled to approach the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.

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

6. As rightly contended by the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2, it will be open for the petitioner to approach the Waqf Tribunal to contend about the manner of filling up of the office of the Mutawalli, namely, whether it should be done by the Waqf Board by recognising the hereditary trustee or whether it should be the jamathars who will be selecting the Hereditary office of the Mutawalli. It is contended that all the jamathars are linear descendants of the original inamdars. Therefore, it is only the Tribunal, after recording such evidence as may be necessary, can one way or the o