The legislative intent of granting such a limited exemption having been thus clearly brought out by sections 88(1) and 16 of the Act, the question would be whether by enacting section 9 the Legislature really intended to accord or has actually accorded favourable treatment to Muslim trusts in the matter of granting exemption in the manner suggested by counsel for the appellant ? Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the appellant the question raised for determination may be formulated thus: Whether sections 8 and 9 while providing for exemption to charitable or religious trusts discriminate between agricultural income derived from lands held under non Muslim public trusts and those held under Muslim trusts and accord to the latter a favourable treatment as against the former by confining the exemption in the former case to such income as has been actually spent for public purposes of charitable or religious nature ? In other words is section 8(1) which confers a limited exemption as compared to section 9 hit by article 14 ? It 662 has not been disputed before us that Muslim trusts known as Wakf alal aulad constitute a distinct class from other types of wakfs but the discrimination complained of is founded upon plea that section 9 of the Act covers all Musalman wakfs and not merely wakfs known as the Wakf alal aulad and, therefore, it will be necessary to examine the provisions of section 9 in order to ascertain whether the plea that it covers all Musalman wakfs is warranted or not.