Saiyyad Ahmad Khan v. Mufti Umar Faruque Mondal

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 70 of 2020 Saiyyad Ahmad Khan S/o Late Abdul Ajeez Khan Aged About 55 Years R/o Talapara, Sunni Masjid Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Mufti Umar Faruque Mondal S/o Ansar Ali Aged About 23 Years R/o Sunni Husaini Masjid, Talapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Sc And St Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5. C.G. State Wakf Board Through Chief Executive Officer, Near Ambedkar Statue, Collectorate Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

6. Station House Officer P.S. Civil Lines, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. P. N. Bharat with Mr. Vivek Shrivastava For State :

Mr. V. R. Tiwari, Addl. AG with Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG For Respondent No.5 :

Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/s :

Mr. S. S. Rathore, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18/05/2020

1. The review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 03.01.2020 passed in WPC No. 4749/2019. It would be relevant to consider and reproduce the operative part of the direction issued by this Court in the said writ petition.

"4. Given the aforesaid provisions of law and also taking into consideration the peculiar grievance that the petitioner has raised,

this Court is of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioner could be best redressed by the respondents No.2 & 4. The petitioner seems to have already approached both these authorities. Therefore, it is expected that respondent No.2 as well as respondent No.4 shall take appropriate steps in ensuring redressal of the grievance of the petitioner in respect of smooth offering of prayer at Sunni Hussain Masjid, Talapara, Bilaspur, in accordance with law."

2. From the plain reading of the aforesaid directions by this Court, it clearly reveals that this Court had clearly expressed that the dispute is not one which needs adjudication by the Writ Court and had left the matter to be redressed by the respondent No.2 Collector in the writ petition and respondent No.4 the Chhattisgarh State Wakf Board.

3. The reading of the operative part of the order dated 03.01.2020, it clearly reflects that there has been no adjudication of a dispute done by this Court either in favour of the original petitioner or against the applicant who has filed the present review petition. The whole issue involved in the case has been left open to be considered and decided on merits in accordance with law by the Collector and the Wakf Board.

4. The present review petition has been filed only on the ground that perhaps the petitioner is trying to misinterpret before the Collector and Wakf Board so far as the order passed by this Court on 03.01.2020 is concerned. The said ground of the petitioner would only fructify in the event an adverse action or an order is passed by the Collector or the Wakf Board detrimental to the review petitioner.

5. This Court is of the opinion that as of now he should not have any grievance as such.

6. Reserving the right of the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy in case if any action detrimental to his interest is passed. This Court

does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner calling for the review of order dated 03.01.2020.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit