Madras High Court
A.Ibrahim Sha vs The Chief Executive Officer on 2 July, 2018
Author: S.S.Sundar
Bench: S.S.Sundar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.07.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
W.P(MD)No.7859 of 2018
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.7436 of 2018
A.Ibrahim Sha ... Petitioner
vs
1.The Chief Executive Officer,
Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,
1, Jaffar Syrang Street,
Vallal Seethakathi Nagar,
Chennai ? 600 001.
2.The Deputy Secretary-I,
Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,
1, Jaffar Syrang Street,
Vallal Seethakathi Nagar,
Chennai ? 600 001.
3.The Deputy Secretary-II,
Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,
1, Jaffar Syrang Street,
Vallal Seethakathi Nagar,
Chennai ? 600 001.
4.The Superintendent of Wakfs Ramanathapuram,
Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,
No.159/3, Tharapasayamman Road,
Vellipattinam,
Ramanathapuram ? 623 504.
(Administrator Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab
Periya Pallivasal Jamath).
5.The Superintendent of Wakfs Madurai,
Additional in-charge of Ramanathapuram,
1, Town Hall Road,
Pallivasal Complex, 2nd Floor,
Madurai-1.
6.A.M.Abdul Kader ... Respondents
(R6 impleaded vide order dated 18.04.2018 in W.M.P.(MD)No.7911 of 2018).
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to implement
the undertaking given by the respondents in proceedings
No.Na.Ka.No.14319/09/A3/Virdhu, dated 23.03.2017 with regard to implementing
the recommendations made by the first respondent Board in its resolution
dated 03.03.2015 and holding of election to the Sivakasi Muslim Shafi
Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf.
!For Petitioner :Mr.R.Govindaraj
^For R1 to R4 :No Appearance
For R5 :Mr.K.K.Senthil
For R6 :Mr.M.P.Senthil
:ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to implement the undertaking given by the respondents in proceedings No.Na.Ka.No.14319/09/A3/Virdhu, dated 23.03.2017 with regard to implementing the recommendations made by the first respondent Board in its resolution dated 03.03.2015 and holding of election to the Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf.
2.The petitioner states that he is one of the members of Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf, which is a notified Wakf.
3.The brief facts set out in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition are as follows:
3.1.The persons, who were in-charge of the affairs of the Wakf previously were not duly elected to manage the affairs of the Wakf and their election was not approved by the Wakf. Since the office bearers mismanaged the Wakf properties for their personal gains, the petitioner along with other members of the Wakf, made complaints to the respondents 1 to 4 about the misdeeds committed by the persons, who were in-charge of the affairs of the Wakf. On the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, the first respondent constituted a fact finding committee to enquire into the mismanagement and misdeeds committed by the erstwhile office bearers. A Sub-
Committee consisting of 3 members conducted an elaborate enquiry after giving notice to all the parties and submitted its report. On the basis of the enquiry report, the first respondent in its meeting dated 03.03.2015 decided to manage the said Wakf directly and also to take necessary action to implement the recommendations of the Enquiry Committee. Challenging the order passed by the first respondent, the erstwhile office bearers of the Wakf preferred a revision to the Government and filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.15539 of 2015 for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 4 from taking control of the Wakf. Ultimately, the said Writ Petition was dismissed on 07.01.2016. Though the erstwhile office bearers preferred a Wakf Original Petition in W.O.P.No.1 of 2016 before the Sub Court, Srivilliputhur, there was no interim order and ultimately the administration of the Wakf was taken over by the fourth respondent only in May'2016. The fourth respondent, namely, the Superintendent of Wakf, Ramanathapuram took steps to rectify several aspects in the interest of Wakf and the process is still pending. Pursuant to the direction in a Writ Petition filed by the sixth respondent in W.P.(MD)No.1903 of 2017, the respondents 1 to 4 took steps to hold election for the Wakf. The petitioner was also constrained to file another Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.4759 of 2017 and the respondents produced before this Court, the proceedings dated 20.03.2017, stating that only after implementing the recommendations of the Wakf Board in its proceedings dated 03.03.2015, the election will be conducted. Recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 4, the said Writ Petition was closed.
4. The petitioner made several representations to the first respondent to implement the recommendations pointed out by the facts finding committee and to fulfil the undertaking given by the first respondent before this Court. The respondent has not taken any steps to implement the recommendations of Committee as appointed by the Wakf Board by its resolution dated 03.03.2015 and to rectify the mistakes done by the previous office bearers and to set right the administration. However, the respondents are taking steps to notify the election to the Wakf, which will cause great loss to the object of the Wakf as well as the properties of the Wakf.
5. The petitioner also prayed for an order of injunction restraining the respondents from notifying and holding any election to the Wakf, until the first respondent's resolution dated 03.03.2017 is implemented in toto. From the narration of events, this Court find that the prayer in the Writ Petition is not appropriate and the bona fides of the petitioner is doubtful in seeking a prayer to stall the election.
6. The sixth respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the writ petitioner, in collusion with the erstwhile Superintendent of Wakf, Ramanathapuram, who was also appointed as its Executive Officer to manage the affairs of the Wakf, involved in various misappropriation and mismanagement against the interest of the Wakf and that therefore the present Writ Petition has been filed with an intention to protect the petitioner himself from getting exposed for his illegal activities committed in collusion with erstwhile Executive Officer. It is further stated that if at all the petitioner has any grievance, he could have approached the Wakf Board holding election for the proper administration of Wakf will not take away the remedy available to the Writ Petitioner to implement the recommendations of the Wakf Board. It is also stated by the sixth respondent in his counter that the Writ Petition is wholly misconceived. The sixth respondent also relied upon the proceedings of the Wakf Board dated 08.03.2018, wherein, the Wakf Board has passed an order directing the Superintendent of Wakf, Ramanathapuram to enumerate the voters list and to conduct election by secret ballot system for electing the new Managing Committee to the Wakf. In the same order, it was also referred to the resolution of the Wakf Board, dated 03.03.2015, wherein, the erstwhile Management Committee headed by one Janab.S.P.J.Nagoor Meeran, was disqualified from being elected as a member of the Management Committee for a period of five years from the date of removal as per Section 64(8) of the Waqf Act, 1995.
7. Incidentally, it is also relevant to point out that the same petitioner has filed another Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.8172 of 2018 for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.03.2018. In the petitioner's representation dated 10.03.2018, the petitioner has stated as follows:
?Nkw;fz;l gs;spfspy; jhshh; epakdk; xg;Gjy; toq;fg;glhjjhy; gs;spfspy; eph;thfrPh;NfLfs; Vw;gl;Ls;sJ. NkYk; fhypahf cs;s Mrphpag;gzpaplq;fs; epug;gg;glhjjhy; khzth;fSf;F chpa fy;tp toq;f ,ayhj R+oy; Vw;gl;Ls;sjhy; khzth;fspd; fy;tpjuk; ghjpf;fg;gLk; mghak; Vw;gl;Ls;sJ.
MfNt fy;tpj;Jiw mjpfhhpfshd jhq;fs; cldbahf ePjpkd;w cj;juT kw;Wk; tf;G jPh;khdj;jpd; mbg;gilapy; jkpo;ehL muR jdpahh; gs;spfy;tprl;lk; rpWghd;ikfy;tp epWtdq;fSf;F mspf;fgl;l chpikfis fhf;Fk; tz;zk; rptfhrp \hgp kj;`G nghpags;spthry; kw;Wk; mijrhh;e;j K];yPk; gs;spfshd rptfhrp K];yPk; Nky;epiyg;gs;sp> njhlf;fgs;sp> koiyah kw;Wk; njhlf;fg;gs;sp (eh;rhp) gs;spfs; kw;Wk; nksyhdh mGy;fyhk; Mrhj; IbI Nghd;w fy;tp epWtdq;fSf;fhd eph;thf mjpfhhpahf epakpf;fg;l;l tf;G fz;fhzpg;ghsh; mth;fspd; jhshsh; epakd fUj;JUit gjpT nra;J Xg;Gjy; toq;fp cldb eltbf;if vLf;f kpfj;jho;ikAld; Nfl;Lf;nfhs;fpNwd;.?
8. The petitioner has stated that since the educational institutions and the students are affected due to non-filling of vacancies, the appointment of Superintendent of Wakf as the Executive Officer and Correspondent of the Educational Institutions run by the Wakf should be approved immediately. This Writ Petition was of-course withdrawn by the petitioner after the learned Counsel for the sixth respondent mentioned before this Court earlier that the main intention of the petitioner is to enable the Superintendent of Wakf to make appointment unilaterally on his own and to stall the election for the said purpose. Since the other Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, at this stage, this Court has just noted the submission of learned Counsel for the sixth respondent.
9. It is seen that the Wakf, known as Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf, was established in the year 1875 and it was registered as a Wakf by the first respondent Board on 14.09.1955. It is not in dispute that that the said Wakf was administered all these years by the Elected Committee consisting of 11 members including President, Vice- President, Treasurer and Secretary. Apart from religious affairs, the Elected Committee is also managing the two schools, namely, Muslim Higher Secondary School, Sivakasi and Moulana Abdul Kalam Azad ITI, Sivakasi, besides various other properties. It is not in dispute that the Wakf Board by its resolution dated 03.03.2015, passed an order for direct management and the Wakf is now under the direct management of the Wakf Board and the period is also extended for further two years. It is the prime duty of the Wakf Board to see that the Wakf is administrated by the Elected members of Wakf in a democratic manner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.4759 of 2017, which reads as follows:
?.....4.When the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr.K.K.Senthil, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 produced proceedings of the Wakf Board dated 20.03.2017, stating that only after implementation of the recommendations of the Wakf Board proceeding dated 03.03.2015, the election will be conducted and therefore, the prayer sought for by the petitioner has been sufficiently answered by the said communication.
5.In the above said circumstances, since the issue has already been addressed by the Wakf Board itself by their latest communication dated 20.03.2017, nothing survives in the present writ petition for adjudication.
Therefore, recording the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the proceedings of the Wakf Board dated 20.03.2017, this Writ Petition is closed as no orders are necessary. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. There is no order as to costs.
10. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent has already given an undertaking before this Court that the election will be held after the implementation of the recommendations of the Wakf Board in its proceedings dated 03.03.2015 and that therefore, the election can be conducted only after the implementation of the recommendations of the Wakf Board. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner himself has filed the earlier Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.4759 of 2017 with a prayer to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.03.2017 with regard to holding of election to the Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf. Hence, no significance can be attached to the submission of the learned Counsel for the Wakf Board so as to enable the petitioner to contend that the election cannot be conducted before the implementation of the recommendations of the Wakf Board. The decision of the Wakf Board, dated 03.03.2015, is to take over the management and to bring the Wakf under the direct management of the Wakf Board. In the same proceedings, the Executive Officer was directed to take steps to protect the properties of Wakf and to remove the encroachment in Wakf properties and to administer the Wakf efficiently. There is a further direction to take action as per the recommendations of the Committee and to conduct election by secret ballot system.
11.From the sequence of events and facts, the contention of the petitioner that the election cannot be conducted till such time, the action is taken on the recommendations of the Committee, does not appear to be a bona fide request. As stated by the learned Counsel for the sixth respondent, the interim prayer sought for in the present writ petition indicates that the petitioner has got some special interest in keeping the administration under the control of Superintendent of Wakf for unknown reasons. The grievance of the petitioner while filing the earlier Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.4759 of 2017 was about the delay in conducting the election. The same petitioner has now filed the writ petition for restraining the respondents from conducting election till some action is taken as per the recommendations of the Committee appointed by the Wakf Board earlier. Hence, this Court is unable to see any valid reason to entertain this Writ Petition and this Court find that there is no merit in the prayer that the respondents shall not conduct the election till the respondents implement the undertaking given by the respondents in proceeding dated 20.03.2017, regarding the implementation of recommendations made by the first respondent in its resolution dated 03.03.2015.
12.Having regard to the interest of Wakf and its members, the respondents 1 to 4 are directed to hold the election to the Sivakasi Muslim Shafi Mathahab Periya Pallivasal Wakf as per its schedule without any unnecessary delay. However, the respondents 1 to 4 are directed to implement the recommendations of the Sub-Committee regarding the corrective measures as per the recommendations in accordance with law and in due course. It is open to the petitioner to approach the Wakf Board in this regard, however, any representation of the petitioner to the Wakf Board, shall not be considered in relation to the conduct of the election or to stall the election.
13.With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
.