Md. Tanweer v. The Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7346 of 2015 ======================================================
1. Md. Tanweer, Son of Late Md. Quamruddin, resident of MohallaBrahpura, P.S. Lodipur, District-Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board, Patna, through its Chairman;
2. The Chairman, Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board, Patna; null null
3. The Secretary, Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board, Patna;
4. The Executive Officer, Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board, Patna;
5. Md.Muslim, son of Late Abdul Ghani, resident of Mohalla- Barahpura, P.S. Lodipur, District-Bhagalpura.
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nesar Ahmad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rashid Izhar For the Waqf Board : Mr. Helal Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-05-2018 In the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 23.09.2014 passed by the Bihar Waqf Tribunal, Patna in Waqf Appeal No. 14 of 2013 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law.
Mr. Helal Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before this Court against the order of the Tribunal. In this regard, he has placed reliance on a decision of
Patna High Court CWJC No.7346 of 2015 (2) dt.02-05-2018 2/3 this Court in Md. Wasiur Rahman & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (CWJC No. 14622 of 2017) disposed of on 25.04.2018. In the case of Md. Wasiur Rahman (Supra), this Court taking into consideration various provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995 in detail as also the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Sadhana Lodh Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [(2003) 3 SCC 524], and the decisions of the High Court of Shimla in Mumtaz Ahmed and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors. 2017(1) ShimLC 338], the High Court of Gujarat in Zubedaben Mohammedmiya and Ors. Vs. Gujarat State Waqf Board and ors. decided on 16.12.2015 in Special Civil Application No. 18852 of 2014, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Md. Abdul Kareem and Anr. Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board and Ors.
[2004(3) ALT 254] and the High Court of Karnataka vide judgment dated 26.08.2017 in Syed Asadulla Hussaini Vs. The Karnataka State Board of Wakfs Darul Awkaf, came to the conclusion that in terms of proviso to sub-section (9) of Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 any person aggrieved by the orders of the Tribunal can invoke revisional jurisdiction of the High Court and a writ petition under Article 226 or a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would not be maintainable. For the reasons assigned in Md. Wasiur Rahman & Anr.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7346 of 2015 (2) dt.02-05-2018 3/3 petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Tribunal dated 23.09.2014 is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to invoke the proviso to sub-section (9) of Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995 for redressal of his grievance. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep/- U