Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Jabbarul Sheikh & Ors vs Board Of Wakfs on 21 February, 2011

Author: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                              1


                      In The High Court At Calcutta
                               Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                                        Appellate Side


Present : The Hon'ble Mr Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                W.P. No.2917 (W) of 2011
                                 Jabbarul Sheikh & Ors.
                                          -vs-
                               Board of Wakfs, West Bengal

        Mr. Sahidullah Munshi
        Mr. Dipankar Paramanick                           ....for the petitioners

        Mr. Khwaja A. Rahaman                              ....for the Board.

Heard on : February 21, 2011

Judgment on : February 21, 2011

        The Court : The petitioners in this art.226 petition dated February 14,
2011 are seeking the following principal relief:
      "A. A Writ in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the respondent

and/or its subordinates and agents to initiate a proceeding for enrolment and Appointment of Mutwalli and to act in accordance with law."

Counsel submits that the second petitioner's undated application (at p.13) for enrolment of the property, particulars whereof were given in the application, as a wakf estate under s.44 of the Bengal Wakf Act, 1934 and appointing the persons named in para.8 of the application as the mutawalli has not been considered by the Board of Wakf, West Bengal.

According to him, in view of the provisions of s.36(7) of the Wakf Act, 1995 the Board was under an obligation to initiate proceedings, give notice, hear the petitioners and decide the question whether the property was a wakf property, and also to consider the question of appointing the petitioners as the mutawalli if it was found that the property was a wakf property.

Counsel for the Board submits that on receipt of the application the Board, treating the application as one under s.36(3) of the Wakf Act, 1995, has 2 already started making enquiry for deciding whether the property is a wakf property. His further submission is that the question of appointing any one as the mutawalli will arise only if the Board holds that the property is a wakf property.

In view of the submission of counsel for the Board that on receipt of the application the Board, treating it as an application under s.36(3) of the Wakf Act, 1995, has already started making enquiry for ascertaining whether the property is a wakf property, in my opinion, there is no need to examine the question whether this petition should be entertained. In this connection reference can be made to the Supreme Court decision in Board of Wakf, West Bengal & Anr. v. Anis Fatma Begum & Anr., (2011) 1 WBLR (SC) 308.

For these reasons, the petition is disposed of saying that the parties will be free to proceed according to law. No costs. Certified xerox.

(Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.) sb