Madhya Pradesh High Court
Haneef Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 September, 2010
W.P.No. 244 / 2010
(Haneef Khan.. v. State of M.P. & others)
23-09-2010
Shri S.K.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned G.A. for the State/respondents.
Shri S.A.Wakeel, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 3.
Shri Mukhtar Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties on I.A.No. 4362/2010 filed by the respondent No. 8 for vacating the interim order dated 26-3-2010. Also heard on the preliminary objections raised by the respondents as to the maintainability of the petition.
As agreed by the learned counsel for the parties the aforesaid issue is being decided by this order.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 6-11-2009 passed by the M.P. Wakf Board, the respondent No.2 whereby the wakf has been registered and the respondent No. 8 has been appointed as a Mutawalli thereof.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a serious dispute in respect of the ownership of the land, in question, which has been dedicated to the wakf by the respondent No. 8 and in such circumstances while the Wakf Board has refrained from passing any order on the application filed by the petitioner for registering a wakf and appointment of Mutawalli, it has proceeded to register a wakf application filed by the respondent No. 8 in respect of Khasra No. 39/2 of village Koodan, Tahsil Patan, District Jabalpur and to appoint him Mutawalli thereof in spite of similar dispute pending before the Revenue authorities . The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the Wakf Board has failed to take into consideration the fact that the respondent No. 8 has created a wakf in respect of only 3960 sq. ft. of land out of a total of 0.122 hectares of Khasra No. 39/2 and by overlooking the said aspect has registered the wakf on the entire area of Khasra No. 39/2 which indicates total non-application of mind on the part of the respondent No. 2. It is also submitted that it is in fact the petitioner who was managing Dargah of Hazrat Zindabali Shah but the respondent No. 8 by suppressing all the aforesaid facts has got the wakf registered and got himself appointed as Mutawalli thereof. It is also alleged by the petitioner that the Wakf Board while passing the impugned order has not followed the procedure prescribed by law.
The respondents, per contra, have submitted that the petitioner has an alternative efficacious statutory remedy of approaching the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1995') in respect of the disputes raised by him before this Court and in such circumstances as the petitioner has an alternative efficacious, statutory, remedy, the petition filed by him deserves to be dismissed.
From a perusal of the record it is clear that the petitioner does have an alternative efficacious statutory remedy of approaching the Tribunal under the Act of 1995 against the impugned order dated 6-11-2009 passed by the respondent No.2, M.P. Wakf Board. Apart from the above, as the issues raised by the petitioner involve decision on disputed questions of fact which this Court is not competent to decide in the proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, it would be appropriate if the petitioner is directed to avail of the alternative efficacious statutory remedy available to him under the provisions of the Act of 1995.
In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the competent Tribunal under the provisions of the Act of 1995 against the impugned order dated 6-11-2009 passed by the M.P. Wakf Board, the respondent No. 2 by taking appropriate proceedings before the competent forum. The petitioner would also be at liberty to obtain interim orders from the forum prescribed under the Act of 1995 by filing an appropriate application before it.
As is apparent from a perusal of the record, this Court by order dated 26-3-2010 has granted an interim order to the petitioner, therefore, it is directed that in case the petitioner approaches the competent forum as directed above within a period of one month from today, the interim arrangement made by this Court shall continue till an order is passed by the competent forum under the provisions of the Act of 1995 on the application for stay filed by the petitioner along with the proceedings taken up by him before the forum. It need not be specified or specifically mentioned that looking to the dispute involved in the petition the Wakf Tribunal, before whom the proceedings are taken up, shall expedite the decision in the proceedings initiated by the petitioner.
With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
( R.S.Jha ) Judge mct