S.1 Short title

       This Act may be called the Kazis Act, 1880;
       1[***]
       Local Extent.—It extends, in the first instance, only to the territories administered by the Governor of Fort Saint George in Council. 2[But the Government of any other State] may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, extend it to the whole or any part of the territories under its administration3.
        
       -------------------------------------------
       1. The words “and it shall come into force at once” rep. by Act 10 of 1914, sec. 3 and Sch. II.
       2. Subs. by Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3 and Sch., for “But the Government of any other Part A State or the Government of a Part C State” (w.e.f. 1-4-1951).

S.2 Power to appoint Kazis for any local area

       Wherever it appears to the State Government that any considerable number of the Muhammadans resident in any local area desire that one or more Kazis should be appointed for such local area, the State Government may, if it thinks fit, after consulting the principal Muhammadan residents of such local area, select one or more fit persons and appoint him or them to be Kazis for such local area.
       If any question arises whether any person has been rightly appointed Kazi under this section, the decision thereof by the State Government shall be conclusive.
       The State Government may, if it thinks fit, suspend or remove any Kazi appointed under this section who is guilty of any misconduct in the execution of his office, or who is for a continuous period of six months absent from the local area for which he is appointed, or leaves such local area for

Legal Comments

• "Scope" - Kazis Act, 1880 Section 2 empowers State Government to appoint Kazis for local areas upon desire of local Muhammadan residents after consulting them; appointment is not exclusive and does not create rights to the office - [MOULANA MOULVI KAZI SYED SHAFIUDDIN AND ASGHAR HUSSAIN VS STATE OF KARNATAKA]

• "Appointment procedure" - Section 2 requires consultation with principal Muhammadan residents; words "if it thinks fit" do not override statutory requirement; non-consultation can render order liable to quashing - [00200026270]

• "No exclusive right" - Appointments under Section 2 do not confer exclusive rights or powers; Section 4 clarifies no judicial/administrative power is conferred and appointment does not render Kazi presence at marriages compulsory - [KHAJI ABDUL WAHAB SIDDIGIR VS GOVT OF KARNATAKA], [Kazi Ahmed Mohiuddin Farooqui s/o Kazi Wahiduddin Farooqui VS State of Maharashtra]

• "Judicial review" - Courts consistently hold: appointment is a mere title, discretionary with Government; denial of appointment does not by itself create a cause of action for writ unless rights arise under statute - [KHAJI ABDUL WAHAB SIDDIGIR VS GOVT OF KARNATAKA], [MOULANA MOULVI KAZI SYED SHAFIUDDIN AND ASGHAR HUSSAIN VS STATE OF KARNATAKA], [ABDUL VADUD JAFRI VS GULJAR MOIUDDIN]

• "Naib Kazi" - Section 3 permits Naib Kazi appointments by the Kazi; previous State Government approval not required for appointment/removal of Naib Kazi; rights/obligations governed by Act post-1951 in local area - [KHAJI ABDUL WAHAB SIDDIGIR VS GOVT OF KARNATAKA], [Khazi hamid Faisal Siddique, Son Of Late Mr. Khazi Mohammed Hussain Siddique vs State Of Karnataka, Department Of Minority Welfare, HAJ and WAKF, Vidhana Soudha, Represented By Its Principal Secretary]

• "Local area jurisdiction" - Government may appoint Kazis for multiple villages/local areas based on local demand; the State’s decision is final when question of right to appointment arises - [Qazi Habeeb Abdullah Rifai VS Principal Secretary to Govt. , Minorities Welfare Department, Govt. of A. P. , Hyderabad], [Maulana Mohd. Riyasat Ali VS State of U. P. ]

• "Hereditary claims" - Kazis Act does not recognize hereditary rights to office; a person claiming hereditary title lacks enforceable entitlement to appointment under the Act - [Kazi Ahmed Mohiuddin Farooqui s/o Kazi Wahiduddin Farooqui VS State of Maharashtra], [00200038674] (illustrative theme across cases)

• "Powers vs. duties" - Section 4 explicitly prevents implying that Kazis have exclusive authority; even where Wakf boards or other bodies attempt to regulate fees or booklet sales, such acts exceed statutory authority and are fended off by courts - [A. P. State Wakf Board VS Hafiz Syed Saleem Basha], [Hafiz Syad Saleem Basha VS A. P. State Waqf Board]

• "Writ petitions on appointment" - Courts routinely dismiss petitions challenging appointments where proper consultative process under Section 2 was followed or where petitioner has no enforceable right to appointment; petitions often fail if due process under Section 2 is satisfied - [Qazi Ahmed Masood Moinuddin VS State of Telangana], [V. V. A. Salahuddeen Aalim VS Government of Tamil Nadu]

• "Section 4 scope" - Section 4(k) clarifies that nothing in Act confers power, and that appointment does not render presence at marriage mandatory; courts rely on this to reject argument that a Kazi must certify every marriage or preside at all rites - [Kazi Ahmed Mohiuddin Farooqui s/o Kazi Wahiduddin Farooqui VS State of Maharashtra], [00900052551] (illustrative)

• "Writ mandamus vs. appointment" - Article 226 petitions challenging appointment must show a legal right to office or a statutory duty breached; absence of right leads to dismissal - [Naseem Sultana Syeda W/o Parvez Mohamed Caliph VS State of Telangana], [MOULANA MOULVI KAZI SYED SHAFIUDDIN AND ASGHAR HUSSAIN VS STATE OF KARNATAKA]

• "Fees and regulation" - Circulars by Wakf Boards imposing fees or requiring Kazis to purchase booklets are generally struck down as unauthorised under the Act; fees regulation asserted beyond statutory grant - [Hafiz Syad Saleem Basha VS A. P. State Waqf Board], [A. P. State Wakf Board VS Hafiz Syed Saleem Basha]

• "Private associations" - Private appointment of Kazis for marriages is permissible for performative acts, but such marriages cannot be registered under Act or Assam registration framework unless performed by a Kazi appointed under relevant statute; private Kazis lack exclusive statutory authority - [All Assam Muslim Marriage and Divorce Registrar and Kazi Association, Morigaon VS State of Assam and others]

• "Religious duties vs. secular status" - The Act acknowledges Kazis perform ceremonial religious duties; the office is not purely secular, but the Act expressly preserves non-exclusive, non-judicial scope and does not vest exclusive control in Government-appointed Kazis - [Shaik Hafeez VS Principal Secretary Minority Welfare Department], [Qazi Habeeb Abdullah Rifai VS Principal Secretary to Govt. , Minorities Welfare Department, Govt. of A. P. , Hyderabad]

• "Consultation standard" - Adequate consultation must be shown; mere endorsement by an MLA or non-local endorsement cannot substitute for consultation with principal Muhammadan residents; failure to consult can lead to quashing - [Qazi Ahmed Masood Moinuddin VS State of Telangana], [Riyazuddin Khazi VS State of Karnataka, The Secretary to Govt. , Minority Welfare Department]

• "Gender and eligibility" - Several judgments do address whether a woman can be appointed Kazi; some judgments note evolving considerations, but core principle remains that appointment is governed by Section 2 and local demand; absence of express prohibition on female Kazis in some decisions reflects statutory silence rather than a positive right - [Qazi Mohammed Najamuddin Hussain VS Government of A. P. , Minorities and Welfare Dept. , rep- by its Principal Secretary], [A. P. State Wakf Board VS Hafiz Syed Saleem Basha]

• "Role of Sec. 4 in practice" - Section 4’s restrictions underpin many decisions that a Kazi does not have exclusive rights; even if a person asserts prior status, lack of statutory entitlement leads to dismissal of writs challenging appointment - [Kazi Ahmed Mohiuddin Farooqui s/o Kazi Wahiduddin Farooqui VS State of Maharashtra], [Khazi hamid Faisal Siddique, Son Of Late Mr. Khazi Mohammed Hussain Siddique vs State Of Karnataka, Department Of Minority Welfare, HAJ and WAKF, Vidhana Soudha, Represented By Its Principal Secretary]

• "Civil remedy limitations" - Jurisdiction of civil courts is not barred by Kazis Act per certain decisions; but Section 2’s finality clause makes State Government’s decision conclusive for appointment rights, limiting judicial reconsideration - [ABDUL VADUD JAFRI VS GULJAR MOIUDDIN], [KHAJI ABDUL WAHAB SIDDIGIR VS GOVT OF KARNATAKA]

• "Private marriage registration conflicts" - When Kazis or Wakf boards attempt to issue marriage certificates outside statutory framework (e.g., under State acts), courts have struck down or required compliance with applicable registration statutes (e.g., Karnataka/Assam contexts) - [Mohd Muzaffar Ali Khan vs State of Telangana], [Khazi hamid Faisal Siddique, Son Of Late Mr. Khazi Mohammed Hussain Siddique vs State Of Karnataka, Department Of Minority Welfare, HAJ and WAKF, Vidhana Soudha, Represented By Its Principal Secretary]

• "Parallel judicial system concern" - PILs have asserted that Kazis create parallel judicial systems; Supreme Court jurisprudence rejects such fatwas as non-binding and reiterates that Kazis’ orders lack legal sanctity; courts urge adherence to constitutional hierarchy - [ABDUL VADUD JAFRI VS GULJAR MOIUDDIN]

• "Remedies for grievances" - Where there is dispute about appointment, remedy often lies in revisiting Section 2 process or challenging the decision under constitutional procedure; writ petitions are not substitute for statutory remedy - [V. V. A. Salahuddeen Aalim VS Government of Tamil Nadu], [MOULANA MOULVI KAZI SYED SHAFIUDDIN AND ASGHAR HUSSAIN VS STATE OF KARNATAKA]

• "Comparative jurisdiction notes" - Andhra Pradesh and Telangana decisions consistently emphasize consultation and the non-exclusive nature of Kazi appointments; the Act’s language necessitates fair application and reasoned decision-making - [Qazi Habeeb Abdullah Rifai VS Principal Secretary to Govt. , Minorities Welfare Department, Govt. of A. P. , Hyderabad], [Qazi. Syed Khader Mohiuddin VS State of Telangana]

• "Key takeaway" - The Kazis Act, 1880 creates a framework for Government appointment of Kazis based on local demand and consultation, but it explicitly denies exclusive rights and judicial/administrative powers to Kazis; appointment decisions are generally reviewable but insulated when properly compliant with Section 2 - [KHAJI ABDUL WAHAB SIDDIGIR VS GOVT OF KARNATAKA], [MOULANA MOULVI KAZI SYED SHAFIUDDIN AND ASGHAR HUSSAIN VS STATE OF KARNATAKA]

S.3 Naib Kazis

       Any Kazi appointed under this Act may appoint one or more persons as his naib or naibs to act in his place in all or any of the matters appertaining to his office throughout the whole or in any portion of the local area for which he is appointed and may suspend or remove any naib so appointed.
       When any Kazi is suspended or removed under section 2, his naib or naibs (if any) shall be deemed to be suspended or removed, as the case may be.