IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17979 of 2009 1. MD. MAQSOOD ALAM QURAISHI S/O LATE MD. KHALIL QURAISHI R/O MOHALLA- BELHARIA, P.S. AND P.O.- TEKARI, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE SUNNI WAKF BOARD, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BIHAR STATE SUNNI WAKF BOARD, PATNA 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL) - CUM - THE THEN ADMINISTRATOR OF WAKF ESTATE NO. 380 TAKARI, DISTT.- GAYA 4. MD. HAMID KHAN S/O MD. SALIM KHAN R/O MOHALLA- DEODHARPUR, P.S. AND P.O.- TEKARI, DISTT.- GAYA For the Petitioner:- Mr. M.S. Hoda & Mr. Surya Narain Yadav, Advocates For the Board: Mr. Ram Kishore, Advocate For the Respondent no.4: Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha-I, Advocate ----------- 03. 24.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the Bihar State Sunni Wakf Board and for respondent no.4. The petitioner is stated to have been appointed as the Secretary of the Managing Committee of Wakf Estate No. 380, Tekari at Gaya on 30.5.2008. The tenure of the Managing Committee for three years is to expire on 20.5.2011. He is aggrieved by the order of the Bihar Wakf Tribunal in Title Suit No. 33 of 2009, preferred by respondent no.4 unseating the entire Managing Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.4 was a member of the earlier Managing Committee whose tenure expired on 2 26.7.2005. The writ application preferred by another member of the same Managing Committee was therefore declined interference by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 352 of 2004. Notwithstanding the same, a fresh litigation was generated by respondent no.4 from the same Managing Committee leading to the impugned order. He submits that the Tribunal proceeded to unseat the new Managing Committee without any opportunity to it or a show cause notice for alleged illegality in the constitution of the Managing Committee. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 finds it difficult to satisfy the Court for the justification of having filed Title Suit No. 33 of 2009 as a member of the same Managing Committee which lost its claim in C.W.J.C. No. 352 of 2004, before this Court in a writ petition filed by another of the Managing Committee. The Court has no hesitation in holding that respondent no.4 did not come with clean hands when he filed Title Suit No. 33 of 2009 and perhaps that itself is sufficient to hold that the order dated 11.11.2009 is not sustainable. That brings to the fore the question of the nature of relief to be granted. It has already been noticed that the tenure of the Managing Committee 3 which the petitioner represents shall expire on 20.5.2011. No useful purpose is going to be served for directing the reinstatement of the Managing Committee for barely one and half months. In (2005) 6 SCC 454 (ONGC Ltd. v. Sendhabhai Vastram Patel) It has been held at paragraph 23 as follows:- “23. It is now well settled that the High Courts and the Supreme Court while exercising their equity jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 32 of the Constitution as also Article 136 thereof may not exercise the same in appropriate cases. While exercising such jurisdiction, the superior courts in India may not strike down even a wrong order only because it would be lawful to do so. A discretionary relief may be refused to be extended to the appellant in a given case although the Court may find the same to be justified in law.” The Court therefore sets aside the order dated 11.11.2009 in Title Suit No. 33 of 2009. The affairs of the Wakf shall be managed by an Administrator and elections shall be held forthwith so that the new Managing Committee takes office immediately. The application stands allowed. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)