Abu Nasar Md. Fazlur Rahman vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Basu, learned advocate, assisted by Mr. Patra, appearing for the applicants in C.A.N 4991 of 2018 filed in connection with the writ petition

submits that the applicants are necessary parties and their presence is required for adjudication of the writ petition and prays for addition as party

respondents. Such prayer is considered and allowed upon treating the said application as on the day’s list.

The application is, accordingly, disposed of. The learned advocate on record of the petitioner is granted leave to effect necessary correction in the

cause title of the writ petition. The present writ petition has been preferred inter alia praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondent

nos. 3, 4 and 5 to depute police personnel for maintaining peaceful situation during the ‘Urs’ ceremony scheduled to be held on 31st July, 2018.

Sk. Rahaman, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the ‘Gaddinasin’ of the Mazar of late Pirsaheb Abu

Tahir Mohammed Oli Ullah Al-Quadri. During his life time, Pirsaheb himself has expressed in writing to make the petitioner ‘Gaddinasin’ and

on the basis of such wish, the petitioner is presently the ‘Gaddinasin’ of the Mazar and is entitled to perform the ‘Urs’ ceremony

scheduled to be held on 31st July, 2018. For conducting the said ceremony peacefully, the petitioner undertook on 12th June, 2018 that he would be

following the norms of the State Pollution Control Board and would be complying with the other conditions as stipulated in the document dated 12th

June, 2018, as annexed at page 18 of the writ petition.

Anticipating that during the said ceremony disturbances may be created by the outsiders, the petitioner submitted an application to the respondent no.4

on 6th of July, 2018 requesting him to deploy a police officer and two constables at the cost of the petitioner. As the said representation has not been

considered, the petitioner has approached this Court. He further submits that added respondents would also be free to join the ‘Urs’ ceremony.

Md. Siddiqui, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that since the year 2008 there had been disturbances between two groups

at the time of ‘Urs’ ceremony. In the year 2008 both the groups became violent and attacked each other and for such disturbances three

criminal cases were registered. In the year 2009 also a similar situation occasioned resulting in registration of a further criminal case. On 1st

September, 2015, just before a day scheduled for the ‘Urs’ ceremony, a large number of people gathered in and around the Mazar and created

serious apprehension of breach of peace in the area. The two conflicting groups are never agreeable to settle the dispute among them amicably for

holding the said ceremony peacefully.

He further submits that a series of writ petitions were filed earlier and in one of the said writ petitions being W.P 17413(W) of 2016, the petitioner

himself, upon instruction, withdrew the same and accordingly, the said writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 11th of June, 2018. He

submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer concerned has already called the rival groups for a hearing scheduled to be held today at 3.30 pm. Let a copy

of the said notice as produced be kept on record.

Mr. Basu, learned advocate appearing for the added respondents submits that the applicants are the daughters and heirs of Pirsaheb Abu Tahir

Mohammed Oli Ullah Al-Quadri. A partition deed was executed among the co-sharers of the land in question. Thereafter a family dispute cropped up

which led to filing of a civil suit being Title Suit No.193 of 1987 (renumbered as Title Suit 5 of 2006). An order was passed in the same on 31st July,

2008 against which a title appeal being Title Appeal No.86 of 2008 has been filed and the same is pending. The petitioner is not entitled to conduct the

‘Urs’ ceremony.

From the records produced before this Court it appears that there had been a long standing dispute between the petitioner and the applicants. Both the

groups are not agreeable to sit together and solve the dispute amicably in spite of the best efforts of the administrative authorities. On earlier

occasions, they were summoned for hearing and were advised to settle the dispute but in vain.

In the said conspectus and as there is a dispute among the co-sharers of the property upon which the Mazar exists and as such dispute is purely civil

in nature involving disputed questions of fact pertaining to an immovable property, the same cannot be made the subject matter of a proceeding under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Photostat plain copy

of this order countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the parties on compliance of all formalities.