A.Mansur Husain v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN W.P.Crl.(MD).No.1965 of 2025 A.Mansur Husain ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palani, Dindigul District.
3. The Tahsildar,, Office of Tahsildar, Palani, Dindigul District.
4. The Inspector of Police, Aayakudi Police Station, Aayakudi, Palani, Dindigul District.
5.Jamia Pallivasal, Represented through its Jamath, Puthuayakudi, Palani, Dindigul District - 624 613.
1/6
6. K.Sheik Davood,
7. A.Sheik Ismail,
8. R.Sahul Hameed,
9. A.Abdul Rahman,
10. A.Shanthu Mohamed,
11. K.M.Shajahan, ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to initiate proceeding in respect of the dispute of Administration of the fifth respondent, Jamia Pallivasal situated at Puthuayakudi, Palani, Dindigul District Under Sections 163 and 164 of BNSS, 2023 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2025, within the period as stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen For R-1 & R-3 : M/S.D.S.Neelanchizhian For R-2 & R-4 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R-5 to R-11 : M/s.A.Ajimath Begam
ORDER
The Petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent to initiate proceedings in respect of the dispute over the administration of the Jamia Pallivasal situated at Puthuayakudi, Palani, Dindigul District, to maintain peace 2/6
under Sections 163 and 164 of BNSS by considering the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2025, 2.According to the petitioner, the respondents 5 to 11 are falsely claiming to be members of managing committee without a proper election; that since the respondents have no right to administer the Wakf, there is likelihood of a breach of peace and that therefore, there must be a direction to the Tahsildar to initiate action under Section 164 of the BNSS. 3.The learned counsel for the respondents 5 to 11 would submit that the election of respondents 5 and 6 was recognized by the Wakf Board in its proceedings dated 16.09.2025; that since there was a dispute, the Tahsildar had conducted a peace meeting on 15.10.
2025 and directed the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the Wakf Board, if he is aggrieved by the said order and that the petitioner agreed to do so in the Peace Committee Meeting. 4.It is seen that the petitioner had participated in the peace committee meeting on 15.10.2025. It is also seen that the election of respondents 5 to 11 has been recognized by the Wakf Board in its proceedings dated 16.09.
W.P(MD) No.31508 of 2025 and the same is pending. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to direct the Tahsildar to initiate action under Sections 163 and 164 of BNSS.
5.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
05.11.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No CP To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palani, Dindigul District.
3. The Tahsildar,, Office of Tahsildar, Palani, Dindigul District.
4. The Inspector of Police, Aayakudi Police Station, Aayakudi, Palani, Dindigul District.
4/6
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
CP W.P.Crl.(MD).No.1965 of 2025 05.11.2025 6/6