Dr. M. Sahul Hameed vs The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board and Others

P. Jyothimani, J.—The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 4.8.2010 passed in W.P.(MD) No. 6701

of 2010 by which the learned Judge while dismissing the Writ Petition has directed the appellant to approach the Wakf Tribunal for appropriate

decision.

The issue involved in this case is in respect of Nallur Muslim Mohideen Andavar Pallivasal Wakf relating to the administration of the properties

of the wakf. It is stated that in respect of the administration of the wakf properties, there was an adhoc committee constituted in the year 2006 and

thereafter, having found that there had been some irregularities in the administration, the administration was taken by the wakf itself. However, in

the impugned order passed in 2010, the ad hoc committee came to be appointed once again constituting the members who were already members

in the year 2006 in the ad hoc committee, against whom certain charges were levelled.

It was challenging the adhoc committee, the Writ Petition came to be filed on the ground that in respect of constituting ad hoc committee, there

is no power available to the Wakf Board. The further contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that in the absence of specific provision

enabling the Wakf Tribunal to take up the issues relating to hand over of the wakf properties, the appropriate forum is the Civil Court.

While rejecting the said contention raised by the appellant, the learned Judge has relied upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in I.

Salam Khan Vs. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board and Others, wherein construing the provision of Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, the Division Bench

has held that the words ""any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf or wakf property"" are words of very wide connotation, which

includes the administration of the properties and that the constitution of the ad hoc committee is also coming within the purview of the Wakf and the

Wakf Tribunal alone is the authority to decide the issue.

Mr. M.V. Venkataseshan, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the crux of the Wakf Act lies under Sections 6 and 7

of the Act and that wakf has been restricted regarding the wakf property as to whether the property has been dedicated as wakf property and

nature of the wakf property. He would also refer to the other provisions of the Act, especially Section 51 of the Act, which speaks about the

alienation of the property without the consent of Wakf Board, and in respect of appointment and removal of mutawalli and in such cases, any

person aggrieved by the decision, appeal is provided to the Wakf Tribunal. Therefore, according to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the

constitution of the adhoc committee does not come any where in respect of the wakf properties. Therefore, according to him, the proper course

available for this Court is drive the parties to go to the Civil Court since according to him, Section 85 of the Act does not create bar on civil

jurisdiction on the facts of the case.

We are not in agreement with the said contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant. In I. Salam Khan Vs. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

and Others, while construing the term ""any dispute or question or other matters relating to wakf or wakf properties"" explained u/s 83(2) of the Act

came to be discussed by the Division Bench and it was held that the words ""any dispute, question or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf

property"" are the words of very wide connotation. Relevant para of the judgment reads as follows:

Thus, the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf Property"" are, in

our opinion, words very wide connotation. Any dispute, question or other matters whatsoever and whatever manner which arises relating to a

Wakf or Wakf property can be decided by the Wakf Tribunal....

Even if the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is accepted that Section 83(2) cannot be applicable, a reference to Section 6(1)

of Act which reads as follows:

Disputes regarding wakfs - (1) if any question arises whether a particular property specified as wakf property in the list of wakfs is wakf

property or not or whether a wakf specified in such list is a Shia wakf or Sunni wakf, the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf or any person

interested therein may institute a suit in a Tribunal for the decision of the question and the decision of the Tribunal in respect of such matter shall be

final. Provided that no such suit shall be entertained by the Tribunal after the expiry of one year from the date of the publication of the list of wakfs.

includes any question relating to the wakf property under the Wakf Act. The appointment of ad hoc committee can definitely be said to be relating

to the wakf property and there can be no doubt about that. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the restricted meaning has

to be given for the purpose of deciding about the wakf, in our considered opinion, cannot be accepted at all. More over, in the facts of the present

case, when specific point is raised about the legality of the constitution of ad hoc committee including certain persons who are stated to be

undesirable, certainly, it is the Wakf Tribunal, which is the appropriate authority to decide the issue as per the Wakf Act on appreciation of the

entire facts.

In such view of the matter, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is

dismissed. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.