Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka State Board Of Wakfs, vs The State Of Karnataka, on 9 October, 2013
Author: B.S Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
W.P.Nos.68246/2010 & W.P.Nos.68713-716/2010
C/w W.P.No.60570/2011 (LR)
IN W.P.Nos.68246/2010 & W.P.Nos.68713-716/2010
BETWEEN:
1. The Karnataka State Board of Wakfs
"Darul Awakf"
No.6, Cunningham Road
Bangalore-52,
Rep.by its Chief Executive Officer.
2. The District Wakf Advisory Committee,
Tank Bund Road,
Bellary
Bellary District.
3. The Managing Committee of
Pinjaravadi Panje Ashoor Khana
A Committee constituted under
Section 18 of the Wakf Act, 1995,
Bellary District,
Belalry, rep.by President. ... PETITIONERS
[By Sri Sadiq N.Goodwala, Adv. for P1 & 2,
Sri P.Abdul, Adv. for P3]
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
Rep.by its Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Vikas Soudha, Bangalore-01.
2
2. The Land Tribunal,
Bellary District, Bellary,
Rep.by its Secretary.
3. Ibrahim Baig S/o M.Ibrahim
Since dead by LRs.
(a) Habeebunnisa Begum
W/o late Mulla Ibrahim Baig
Aged about 60 years
(b) M.Riyaz Ali Ahmed Baig
S/o late Mulla Ibrahim Baig
Aged about 30 years
Both r/o Goldsmith Colony,
No.62/28, I Stage, 3rd Cross
Bandihalli Road, Cowl Bazaar Bldg.,
Bellary-2.
(Amended vide Court order dt.30.11.2011)
4. M.Usman Baig
S/o Abdul Wahab
Aged about 75 years
r/o Kalamma Street,
Bellary.
5. M.Usman Baig
S/o Mansoor Baig
Aged about 72 years
r/o Vishwanathpuram
Near Government Guest House,
Bellary.
6. Smt.M.Beejan Bi
W/o late Abdul Rahim Sab
Aged about 75 years
r/o Siruguppa Road
Avvamma Bhavi
Bellary.
7. M.Basheet Ahmad Baig
S/o M.Ibrahim
Aged about 55 years
3
r/o Cowl Bazaar,
Bellary.
8. M.Muneer Ahamed Baig
S/o M.Ibrahim
Aged about 50 years
r/o Cowl Bazaar,
Bellary. ... RESPONDENTS
[By Sri V.M.Sheelvant, Adv. for R3(b)
Sri Mahesh Wodeyar, AGA for R1 & 2
Sri S.A.Huddar & M.S.Haravi, Adv. for R3(a), (b) & R8
Sri Gangireddy & Shivareddy, Advs. for R4 to R6
Sri B.S.Sangati, Adv. for R7.]
IN W.P.No.60570/2011:
BETWEEN:
Sri Mulla Hussain Baig
Aged about 50 years,
Occ: Agriculture/Tea Seller,
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri F.V.Patil, Adv. for Sri Sunil S.Desai, Adv.)
AND:
1. The Land Tribunal
Bellary, Bellary District.
2. The District Wakf Board Committee,
Bellary,
By its Chairman.
M.Yousuf Baig
Since deceased by L.Rs.
3. M.Ibrahim Baig S/o Yousuf Baig
Since deceased, by L.Rs.
4
(a) Habeebunnisa Begum W/o late Mulla Ibrahim Baig
aged about 60 years
Occ: House wife
(b) M.Riyaz Ali Amed Baig
S/o Mullla Ibrahim Baig,
Aged about 32 years
Both are r/o Goldsmith Colony,
No.62/28, 1st Stage, 3rd Cross,
Bandthatti Road, Cowl Bazaar,
Bellary-2.
4. M.Bashher Ahammad Baig S/o Yousuf Baig
Major,
Occ: Agriculture
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary.
5. M.Muneer Ahammad Baig S/o Yousuf Baig
Major,
0Occ: Agriculture
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary.
6. M.Usman Baig S/o Abdul Wahab
Major,
Occ: Agriculture
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary.
7. M.Osman Baig S/o Manasoor Baig
Major,
Occ: Agriculture
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary.
M.Abdul Raheem Sab
Since deceased by L.Rs.
5
8. Smt.M.Bibijan Bee
W/o M.Abdul Raheem Sab
Major,
Occ: Household work
R/o Mochibidi, Brucepet,
Bangalore Road,
Bellary.
9. The Managing Committee of
Pinjaravadi Panje Ashoor Khana
Bellary,
Rep.by President. ... RESPONDENTS
(Amended as per the Court Order)
[By Sri Mahesh Wodeyar, AGA for R1 & 2,
Sri V.M.Sheelvant, Adv. for R3(a & b).
Sri Sadiq N.Goodwala, Adv. for R2
Sri V.P.Kulkarni, Adv. for R3, R6-R8,
Sri M.S.Haravi, Adv. for R4 & 5
Sri P.Abdul, Adv. for R9]
W.P.No.68246/2010 & W.P.Nos.68713-716/2010 filed
under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying
to quash the order dated 8.9.2010 passed by the Land
Tribunal, Bellary vide Annexure-K and etc.
W.P.No.60570/2011 filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated
8.9.2010 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bellary vide Annexure-A
and etc.
These petitions having been heard and reserved for orders
on 25.6.2013, coming on for Pronouncement of Order this day,
the court delivered the following:
ORDER
1. W.P.Nos.68246/2010 & 68713-716/2010 are filed by the Karnataka State Board of Wakfs, the District Wakf Advisory 6 Committee, Bellary and the Managing Committee of Pinjaravadi Panje Ashoor Khana Wakf, Bellary respectively challenging the order dated 08.09.2010 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bellary as per Annexure-K to the writ petitions.
2. By the said order, the Land Tribunal has granted occupancy rights to the applicants - respondents 3 to 8 herein/their predecessors. The petitioners claim that the lands in question are the wakf property endowed to the 3rd petitioner
- Wakf and therefore, application for confirmant of occupancy right was not maintainable and the Tribunal was in error in granting the occupancy right.
3. The other writ petition bearing W.P.No.60570/2011 is filed by one Mulla Hussain Baig challenging the very same order passed by the Land Tribunal contending that his father was the landlord of the properties in question and that without impleading him, the applicants had obtained occupancy rights in their favour from the Land Tribunal. He has contended that the properties in question were not the wakf properties and that he has filed a suit in O.S.No.254/2005 before the II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Bellary seeking declaration and consequential relief in respect of the properties. 7
4. The lands involved in these writ petitions are part of Sy.Nos.184, 192 & 868 measuring 70 acres 42 cents, 12 acres 72 cents and 10 acres 89 cents respectively situated at Bellary. Four persons claimed occupancy rights in respect of different portions of the above lands by filing Form No.1 under the provisions of the Inams Abolition Act. 1) Late M.Ibrahim Baig, son of Yousuff Baig represented by his L.Rs. a) Ibrahim Baig, b) M.Basheer Ahmed Baig and c) M.Muneer Ahmed Baig. 2) Mulla Usman Baig, son of Abdul Wahab 3) Mulla Usman Baig, son of Mansoor Baig 4) M.Abdul Rahim Sab, deceased represented by his wife M.Beejan Bi sought occupancy rights in respect of different extent of lands comprised in these survey numbers. Sri Ibrahim Baig, son of Yousuff Baig appeared before the Tribunal and stated that he was cultivating the land right from the period of his ancestors as Inamdar and that the properties were in his absolute possession and ownership. He denied that it was a wakf property or that the Wakf Board, Bellary had any right over the same. He also brought to the notice of the Court the withdrawal of W.P.No.40029/1993 on 11.10.2001 by the Wakf Board which according to him disclosed that it had no right over the properties in question. Similarly, Mulla Usman 8 Baig son of late Abdul Wahab also appeared and stated before the Tribunal that right from the time of his ancestors he was cultivating the land as Inamdar. He relied on the Title/Patta granted by the Commissioner of Madras on 03.05.1861 to his ancestors Mansoor Baig, Nadeem Baig, Inam Baig, Masoor Baig and Hyder Baig as per patta Nos.2011 and 2695 and urged that since then his ancestors had been cultivating the land in different extents and nobody else had any right over the properties.
5. Similarly, Mulla Usman Baig, Son of Mansoor Baig and Smt.Beejan Bi have also stated before the Tribunal reiterating the very same facts. They have contended before the Tribunal by producing several documents and submitting written arguments that they had developed the lands into irrigated lands and had been paying the land revenue. They also stated that so far as the 10 acres 89 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.868, as it was a fallow land not yielding any benefit, the same had been occupied by certain persons and some constructions had come up there.
6. The Tribunal issued notice to the District Wakf Committee which was arrayed as respondent. Despite service 9 of notice, the District Wakf Committee did not appear and defend itself. The Tribunal conducted spot inspection. It found that though the name of the District Wakf Board was entered in the revenue records in respect of the lands, the same had been so entered without issuing any notice and in violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. The Tribunal recorded a finding that the applicants being Inamdars were in actual possession and cultivation of different portions of the lands and that they were growing crops in the said lands. However, in respect of 10 acres 89 cents in Sy.No.868, the Tribunal found that constructions had come up and the same had been fully developed with all civic amenities and other facilities. The Tribunal considered the evidence on record and the statements made before it. It took note of the fact that the District Wakf Committee had earlier sought for grant of occupancy right in respect of these lands but its application came to be rejected by the Tribunal on 17.03.1982 holding that the Pinjaravadi Panje was not the Inamdar of the suit land.
This order of the Tribunal was challenged in W.P.No.27690/1982 by the Wakf. Later on, after the
amendment to Land Reforms Act by which the Appellate Authorities were abolished, the matter was assigned 10 W.P.No.40029/1993. The said writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.10.2001. The Tribunal has also taken note of the fact that as per the Inam Title Deed No.2695 and 2011, the Madras commissioner had granted Inam Title Deed in favour of the predecessors of the applicants and the applicants had paid land revenue and had been in enjoyment of the property. It also found that the applicants established that they were cultivating the land three years prior to 01.03.1974, as required under the provision of the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 (for short, 'the Act') and were thus entitled for grant of occupancy rights in terms of the provisions contained under Section 5(2) of the Act.
7. The main contentions urged by the petitioners are that -
(i) the impugned order of the Tribunal is passed without notifying the petitioners and without affording an opportunity of being heard to them;
(ii) the respondents are not entitled to claim occupancy rights because they being the Mutawallis of the Wakf could not have maintained an application seeking grant of occupancy rights in respect of the Wakf property.11
8. Elaborating these contentions, Sri P.Abdul and Sri Sadiq N. Goodwala, advocates appearing for the petitioners in the first batch of writ petition submit that the contesting respondents were appointed as Mutavallis on 15.04.1976 and hence, they cannot maintain application seeking occupancy rights. It is urged by them that entries in the revenue records disclose the name of the District Wakf Board and hence, the applicants were never tenants of the land. In support of their contention that Mutavalli cannot claim tenancy, they have relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of KARNATAKA BOARD OF WAKF Vs. LAND TRIBUNAL AND OTHERS - ILR 1999 KAR 3319. They have also relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of SAYYED ALI AND OTHERS Vs. A.P.WAKF BOARD, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS - AIR 1998 SC 972 to contend that once an institution is registered as Wakf, it always remains a Wakf and Wakf being a permanent dedication, grant of patta under Inams Act does not nullify it.
9. Sri F.V.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.60570/2011 has contended that as the petitioner was the owner of the land and an interested person, he was entitled for issue of notice, particularly because his name was 12 found in the RTC as an interested person. He has contended that the Tribunal could not have proceeded on the strength of the affidavits filed before it as held by this Court in the judgment in the case of K.SOMASHEKARA SHETTY Vs. DEVAKI AND OTHERS - 2005 (5) Kar.L.J. 248. He has also relied on the observations made in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of DADU DAYALU MAHASABHA, JAIPUR (TRUST) Vs. MAHANT RAM NIWAS & ANOTHER - AIR 2008 SC 2187 to contend that the judgment of the Courts should not be interpreted as a statute because the meaning of the words used in a judgment must be found out on the backdrop of the facts of each case. What would be binding is the ratio of the decision and such a decision must be arrived at upon entering into the merits of the issues involved in the case.
10. Sri V.M.Sheelvant, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents has strongly rebutted the claim made by the petitioner in W.P.No.60570/2011 that he is an interested person entitled to be notified by the Tribunal. He has placed reliance on ILR 2000 KAR SHORT NOTE No.15, wherein as per the judgment dated 01.09.1999 passed in LRRP No.3882/1988 in the case of G.N.MALLAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS this 13 Court has held that a person who is neither a tenant nor an applicant before the Tribunal has no locus-standi to file an appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal. Sri Sheelvant produces before the Court, for perusal, the original Grant Certificates conferring title on the predecessors of respondents 3 to 8 issued by the Commissioner of Madras during 1861 bearing patta Nos.2011 & 2695. On perusal of these originals, it is clear that they are the original deeds granting title to the Inam lands in favour of the ancestors of the petitioners. Pursuant to these grants, the names of the ancestors of the petitioner has been entered in the Inam Register which is produced at Annexure-R3 along with the statement of objections.
11. Based on these Grant Certificates, xerox copies of which were produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has recorded its findings. The findings of the Tribunal disclose that title had been granted to Mansoor Baig, Nadeem Baig, Inam Baig, Masoor Baig and Hyder Baig by the Inam Commissioner, Madras vide Certificate No.2011 on behalf of the Governor in Council of Madras. Though there is a reference made in the certificate that the title of the aforementioned persons is 14 recognized, no conditions are imposed for the grant. It is not stated therein that the lands were endowed to the Mosque. Similarly, another certificate bearing No.2695 is issued in similar terms. There is nothing to show that the lands had been endowed for religious and pious purpose for the purpose of the Mosque. But, it is evident from the Title Deeds that the Inam lands were granted in favour of the ancestors of respondents 3 to 8. Though they were required to hold the lands for supporting the Mosque, there is nothing to show that it was an endowment in favour of a Wakf. These certificates do not disclose that the grantees were obligated with any duties and functions making it clear that failure to discharge the same, would result in resumption and forfeiture of the lands. Therefore, the findings of the Tribunal in this regard cannot be termed as illegal.
12. The District Wakf Committee had been duly notified by the Tribunal. It did not appear before the Tribunal to produce any material to establish that the property was a wakf property and the applicants were not entitled for grant of occupancy. In fact, in the light of the contentions taken by the petitioner - Wakf Committee urging that no notice was issued by the 15 Tribunal, this Court summoned the original records of the Tribunal. On 09.12.2011, this Court (Justice A.N.Venugopala Gowda) has passed the following order:
"Sri P.S.Mali Patil, who opened arguments on behalf of petitioners were not parties before the Land Tribunal and hence had no opportunity to putforth their say in the matter before the Land Tribunal.
2. Learned Addl. Government Advocate made available the records. It is seen from the record that, the 2nd petitioner herein which has been shown as the respondent in the proceedings before the Land Tribunal, was issued with a notice and the same has been acknowledged on behalf of the 2nd petitioners. The petitioners' interest being common, the 2nd petitioner herein which was the sole respondent in the proceedings before the Land Tribunal, having not filed any objections, the contention that the petitioners had no opportunity to have their say before the Land Tribunal, prima facie, is unacceptable.
3. At this stage, having argued the matter for more than 45 minutes, Sri Mali Patil seeks time.
4. The documents have been produced in the piece meal as and when it suits the convenience of the counsel. In this state of affairs, it is impossible to follow the case.16
5. In the circumstances, the matters stand adjourned to 13.12.2011."
When the arguments were heard on merits, the leaned Additional Government Advocate submitted by producing the records that notice was indeed duly issued to the 2nd petitioner, who was arrayed as respondent in the proceedings before the Tribunal and the same has been acknowledged by the 2nd petitioner. It is clear from the records that notice was indeed served on petitioner No.2. Therefore, the first contention urged by the petitioner - Wakf Committee stating that they were not notified by the Tribunal is not tenable.
13. It is relevant to point out at this stage that the District Wakf Committee had claimed rights over these lands by filing an application before the Land Tribunal and the said application was rejected way back in the year 1982. The same was challenged before this Court by filing W.P.No.40029/1993 and the said writ petition was withdrawn without reserving any liberty. Thereafter, the petitioner - District Wakf Committee has not taken any steps to assert their rights over these lands. 17
14. In terms of Section 4(1) of the Act with effect from and on the appointed date, the inam tenure of all inams and minor inams, to which the Act applies shall stand abolished. The non obstante clause used in this section shows that notwithstanding anything contained in any contract, grant or other instrument or in any decree or order of court or in any other law for the time being in force, such a consequence of abolition of inam ensues. As per Sub-section (2)(b) of Section 4, all rights, title and interest vesting in the Inamdar cease and be vested absolutely in the State Government. As per Section 5(2) of the Act where the Inamdar is an institution of religious worship, a person rendering any service in such institution and personally cultivating the land for a continuous period of not less than three years prior to 01.03.1974 by contributing his own physical labour or that of the members of his family without paying rent in money or in kind to that institution in respect of such land, shall be entitled to be registered as an occupant of such land. As per Section 5(3) of the Act, every Inamdar including the holder of a minor inam shall be entitled to be registered as an occupant of all lands it was personally cultivating immediately before the said date. 18
15. Thus, it is clear that the land being an inam land has stood vested in the State Government. The Inamdars were entitled to seek confirmant of occupancy rights. The District Wakf Committee claimed occupancy by filing Form No.1 which was rejected. The same has attained finality as the writ petition filed against the said order has been withdrawn. The contesting respondents have produced documents to show that Title/Patta was granted in respect of the inam lands way back in the year 1861 in favour of their ancestors. The Tribunal has examined these documents and has come to the conclusion that such grants were indeed made in favour of the ancestors of the contesting respondents. Though the grant was that of title in respect of inam lands, the inam tenure stood abolished by operation of Section 4(1) of the Act. All rights in such lands stood vested in the State Government by operation of Section 4(2)(b) of the Act and Inamdars were vested with right to seek registration of occupancy rights as occupants.
16. The Tribunal has rightly found, on the basis of the evidence before it that the ancestors of the contesting respondents being Inamdars granted with patta over the inam lands, the applicants were entitled for grant of occupancy rights 19 as they were in actual cultivation of the lands three years prior to the appointed date i.e. 01.03.1974.
17. It is not the case of the petitioners that the applicants were not in possession of the property during the relevant period. Their contention is that the applicants were cultivating the properties as Mutawallis and therefore, they were not entitled for occupancy rights. During the course of arguments, they have produced a memorandum dated 15.04.1976 issued by the Karnataka Board of Wakf showing that some of the respondents herein had been appointed as Mutavallis. This Memorandum dated 15.04.1976, at best, can disclose that after the lands stood vested in the State the contesting respondents had been appointed as Mutavallis. There is no material to show that they were appointed as Mutavallis and were cultivating the land in that capacity during the relevant period namely three years prior to 01.03.1974, which is the period during which cultivation by the Inamdar is essential to maintain an application for grant of occupancy under the provisions of the Act. No such material is produced by the petitioner - Wakf to show that during the said period the respondents discharged their duties as Mutavallis.
20
18. So far as the petitioner in W.P.No.60570/2011, he is neither the owner of the land, nor an Inamdar or a tenant, who has claimed occupancy rights. Admittedly, he has not filed any application. Once the land is vested in the State, only those who have filed application in Form No.1 or Form No.7, can have locus-standi to maintain a writ petition challenging the order passed by the Land Tribunal. Therefore, as the land is an inam land and writ petitioner has not claimed any occupancy rights, he cannot be regarded as an interested person and he has no locus-standi to maintain this writ petition. Even if the matter were to be remanded for providing him an opportunity of being heard, as no relief can be granted to him even after hearing him, question of entertaining the writ petition, at his instance, does not arise. In fact, he did not challenge the earlier adverse orders passed by the Tribunal.
19. As regards the complaint made regarding the acceptance of affidavit as evidence on behalf of the parties by the Tribunal, the petitioner in W.P.No.60570/2011, who does not have any locus-standi cannot complain about the procedure adopted by the Tribunal. Indeed the contesting party before the Tribunal was the District Wakf Committee. The District Wakf Committee 21 has chosen not to appear before the Tribunal. The contesting respondents here have given written statements and have also filed affidavits and were represented by their advocates before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has taken note of all the relevant materials including the Grant Certificates, Revenue Records along with the Written Statements placed before it. In such circumstances, merely because some of the applicants have been permitted to file affidavits in support of their case no fault can be found with the order passed by the Tribunal. The applicants were present before the Tribunal. No grievance is made by any of the parties that the statements were not correctly recorded, or that the statements given before the Tribunal by way of written statements was not given by them. At the instance of the petitioner - Wakf who has not chosen to appear before the Tribunal despite service of notice, the order of the Tribunal cannot be interfered on such technical ground. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to take the benefit of the observations made by this Court in K.SOMASHEKARA SHETTY's case - 2005 (5) Kar.L.J. 248, wherein it is stated that witnesses have to be examined personally and their evidence has to be recorded in the language known to the Members of the Tribunal and not on the basis of the affidavits in English language filed 22 by the witnesses. No foundation is laid for this grievance in the facts of the case.
20. As regards the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of SAYYED ALI AND OTHERS Vs. A.P.WAKF BOARD, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS - AIR 1998 SC 972, relied on by the petitioner - Wakf Board, in the facts of the said case as is clear from paragraph 5 of the judgment, the grant or sanad dedicating the property was not produced; there was no evidence on record to show as to who granted the inam and in whose favour and in which year. However, after taking an overall review of the evidence on record, it found that Wakf Board had succeeded in establishing that there was a permanent dedication of the property and that the grant made was subsequently renewed and the Title Deed earlier issued was cancelled as the grantees were not rendering service at the Dargah. This cancellation and resumption of land was challenged by filing a suit. The suit was decreed. The Government preferred an appeal against the said judgment before the Madras High Court. The dispute was compromised between the Government and the grantees. The details of the terms of compromise disclosed that the grantees were required to perform Moharram, monthly festival and spend for annual 23 upkeep of the Dargah to the satisfaction of the Collector of Vishakapatnam, apart from spending certain fixed amount for charity towards the travelling fakirs. Interpreting these terms of the compromise, the Apex Court recorded a finding in paragraph 6 of the judgment that the terms of the compromise indicated that the nature of the property was a service inam and the grant was subject to the condition that they rendered service at Dargah and performed various obligations imposed on them. The said purposes for which they were obligated to spend were pious, religious and charitable. The Court found that under the Wakf Act, such grant answered the description of Wakf. In that background, the Apex Court has held that as the dedication was in favour of Wakf and the property having been found as wakf property, in the light of the principle that once a wakf always a wakf, the grant of patta in favour of Mokhasadar under the Inams Act did not nullify the earlier dedication made of the property constituting the same as Wakf.
21. In the instant case, there is absolutely nothing to show that the properties were dedicated creating a wakf. No conditions were imposed in the Grant Certificate requiring the grantees to spend any money for the purpose of any wakf. 24 There were no such terms and conditions requiring the Inamdars to render any such service in favour of a wakf. Hence, the judgment rendered by the Apex Court cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. The notification issued declaring these properties as wakf properties in the year 1964 will not take away the rights of the Inamdars to maintain an application under Form No.1 because these lands stood vested by operation of law 'notwithstanding anything contained in any contract, grant or other instrument or in any decree or order of Court on in any other law for the time being in force' providing to the contrary.
Hence, I am of the considered view that the writ petitions filed are devoid of merits. None of the contentions urged by the petitioners are sustainable in law. Hence, the writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE PKS