Judicial review applications must be filed within three months of the decision being communicated; failure to adhere to this timeline results in dismissal.

Anand Ponnudurai J:

Introduction

[1] This is an application for judicial review pursuant to O 53 of the Rules of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as " ROC 2012"). Order 53 2012 is the applicable rule that governs applications seeking specific reliefs against decisions of public or administrative bodies and it expressly provides that leave must first be obtained.

[2] It is trite law that the threshold for granting leave is low and that the Applicant need only show prima facie that the application is not frivolous or vexatious and that there is some substance in the grounds supporting the application. [See the Supreme Court case of Association Of Bank Officers, Peninsular Malaysia v. Malayan Commercial Banks Association ; [1990] 3 MLJ 228; [1990] 1 CLJ (Rep) 33 ].

[3] Order 53 ROC 2012 provides that such leave application must be made ex-parte and must be served on the Attorney General's Chambers. The Attorney General's Chambers in most instances do not oppose a leave application. However, in some instances, the Attorney General's Chambers will object to the leave application on various grounds with the common ground normally being that the application for judicial review was filed out of time. This is one such instance with the Attorney General's Chambers contending that the application herein was filed out of time. In this regard, it is not in dispute that O 53 r 3(6) 2012 expressly provides that a judicial review application shall be made within three months from the date when the grounds of application first arose or when the decision is first communicated to the Applicant.

[4] Upon hearing learned Counsel, I was of the view that the application was indeed filed out of the prescribed time and I dismissed the application and will now provide my reasons for having done so.

The Background Facts

[5] The background facts that can be gleaned from the Applicant's affidavit in support can be summarised as follows.

[6] The Applicant was the former Chairman of the Ahli Jawatankuasa Kariah Masjid Al Muharijin Kariah Seberang Jaya Daerah Seberang Perai Tengah for the term 2021-2022 (hereinafter referred to as "the said mosque committee").

[7] The Respondent is the Majlis Agama Islam Pulau Pinang established under s 4 of the Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam (Negeri Pulau Pinang) Tahun 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the said Enactment").

[8] The Annual General Meeting of the said mosque was held on 14 August 2022 to elect individuals for the mosque committee for the term 2023-2025. It is averred that the matters pertaining to the election of the mosque committee are to be in accordance with the Tatacara Pemilihan Calon Jawatankuasa Kariah Negeri Pulau Pinang Tahun 2023-2025 (hereinafter referred to as the "said election procedures") as provided and distributed by the Respondent to all mosques.

[9] The Applicant avers that at such AGM, the said election procedures were all complied with and he was re-elected as the Chairman of the mosque committee uncontested for the term 2023-2025.

[10] The Applicant then avers that in accordance with art 5.1.20 of the said election procedures, a report on the election of the office bearers was prepared in a particular format in Form 8 and a list of the elected candidates (also known as "Senarai Cadangan") in Form 9 was submitted to the District Officer who then submitted the Form 9 to the Respondent for the Respondent to approve the appointment of such office bearers including the Applicant. The Applicant has exhibited the Forms 8 and 9 respectively that were prepared in August 2022 which were forwarded to the Respondent.

[11] From the above, it would appear that the Applicant and the various committee members so elected at the AGM would need their appointments to be confirmed and/or accepted by the Respondent. However, the Applicant avers that he was not contacted by the Respondent nor did he receive any response whatsoever from the Respondent on the Senarai Cadangan that was sent in