Patna High CourtC. REV./55/2020dismissed

Aminur Rahman v. The Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board

2022-07-13Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.55 of 2020 In CIVIL REVISION No.125 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.

Aminur Rahman son Late Sk. Md. Golam Bari resident of mohallaMuradpur Masjid, P.s.- Pirbahore, District- Patna- 800004 2.

Anisur Rahmn son Late Sk. Md. Golam Bari resident of mohalla- Muradpur Masjid, P.s.- Pirbahore, District- Patna- 800004 3.

Anjum Bari son Late Sk. Md. Golam Bari resident of mohalla- Muradpur Masjid, P.s.- Pirbahore, District- Patna- 800004 ... ... Petitioners

Versus

The Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board Haj Bhawan, 2nd Floor, 34 Ali Imam Path (Harding Road), Patna, through its Chief Executive Officer 2.

The Chief Executive Officer, Haj Bhawan, 2nd Floor, 34 Ali Imam Path (Harding Road), Patna ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Md. Ataur Rahman For the Opposite Party :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-07-2022 The petitioners are seeking review of an order dated 22.01.2020 passed in Civil Revision No. 125 of 2018. The order under review reads thus: - "This revision application has been filed against an order dated 13.11.2009 passed by the Chairman, Bihar Waqf Tribunal, Patna.

The application is apparently time barred. No limitation has been filed.

This application is accordingly dismissed as incompetent."

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

Patna High Court C. REV. No.55 of 2020(4) dt.13-07-2022 2/2 does not dispute the fact that the revision application was time barred. He also does not dispute the fact that no application seeking condonation of delay was filed. He, however, submits that against the order dated 13.11.2009 passed by the Chairman, Bihar Waqf Tribunal, Patna, the petitioners had filed a writ petition giving rise to C.W.J.C. No. 13860 of 2010, which was disposed of on 10.05.2018.

Be that as it may, in my view, no ground is made out for review of the order dated 21.01.2020 passed in the said Civil Revision No. 123 of 2018, which was incompetent because of the delay and was rightly dismissed considering the fact that no limitation petition was filed.

This civil review application, in my opinion, is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Pawan/- U