w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n


Kalmandapam Shafi Mosque and Charities Wakf, Rep. By Adhoe Committee, Royapuram v/s A. Mohammed Jafarullah & Others

    C.R.P. (PD) No. 2803 of 2019 & C.M.P. No. 18361 of 2019
    Decided On, 16 March 2020
    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras
    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR
    For the Petitioner: N.A. Nissar Ahmed, Advocate. For the Respondents: R2 & R3, Ms. Sripriya, M/s. Raghavachari, R1, A. Ajimath Begam, Advocates.


Judgment Text

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the docket order dated 16.07.2019 made in CMP. No.26 of 2019 in A.A.No.21 of 2019 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Tribunal, Chennai.)

1. This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the docket order dated 16.07.2019 made in CMP. No.26 of 2019 in A.A.No.21 of 2019 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Tribunal, Chennai.

2. The first respondent has filed a miscellaneous petition in CMP. No.26 of 2019 in A.A.No.21 of 2019 before the Waqf Tribunal, Chennai to include his name in the voters list of the 3rd respondent, namely, Kalmandapam Shafi Mosque and Charities Wakf, No.11, Sheik Mastri Street, Royapuram and the Tribunal has passed the following docket order:

''Heard. Perused. The petitioners address is in the Sheik Maistry Street. The address of the mosque is 11, Sheik Maistry Street, the D.No. Of the petitioner is 19/9. Therefore, he lies between D.No.24 & 11. The Voter list starts from D.No.24 Sheik Maistry Street. The petitioner has made out his case for inclusion of his name in voter list. Therefore, ad-interim direction is granted exparte to include the name in voter list.''

3. Challenging the order of the said Tribunal dated 16.07.2019, the 3rd respondent therein before the Tribunal has filed the present revision before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the trial Court failed to consider that the scheme framed by the Wakf Board does not come within the territorial jurisdiction of the boundaries fixed by the board. The trial Court has granted ad-interim direction in favour of the first respondent herein to include his name in the voters list of the petitioner herein, which is not maintainable and beyond the scope of appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the trial Court has failed to consider that the voter list has to be prepared by the petitioner herein as per the approved scheme and elections to be conducted in the presence of the Wakf Board officials. The trial Court, without considering all these facts, granted an ad-interim direction, which warrants interference of this Court.

5. The learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that only after the election notification, the voter list was prepared by the petitioner herein. When the first respondent approached the petitioner herein, they were rejected to include the name of the first respondent in the voters list. Therefore, the first respondent approached Tribunal and got an ad-interim direction in favour of the first respondent. If the stay is vacated, it will cause hardship to the welfare of the Wakf Tribunal. Hence, the first respondent prays to dismiss the revision petition.

6. According to the learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, the revision petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable and therefore, prays to set aside the order passed by the Tribunal.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and also perused the available records.

8. The learned counsel for the Wakf Board submitted that after passing ad-interim direction, the petitioner has not filed any counter and straight away filed this Civil Revision Petition, which is not maintainable. According to the learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, the Tribunal can dispose of the case on merits.

9. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, it is seen that the first respondent has obtained the order of ad-interim direction by the Tribunal only to stall the election process notified by the Wakf Board. Therefore, the present Civil Revision Petition is not pertaining to challenging the election notification. Therefore, the Tribunal has passed the order of ad-interim directions in favour of the first respondent herein, which is unsustainable in law. Further, the Tribunal, without affording any opportunity to the revision petitioner herein passed the aforesaid order of ad-interim direction.

10. Based on the aforesaid, this Court is directed the revision petitioner to file a counter affidavit in the aforesaid civil miscellaneous petition before the Wakf Tribunal and thereafter,

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
the Tribunal shall pass an appropriate orders in the aforesaid petition on merits. 11. In view of the above facts, the Wakf Tribunal, Chennai is directed to dispose of the CMP. No.26 of 2019 in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. With the above observations and directions, the civil revision petition is disposed of. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
O R