IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16763 of 2011(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. DR.B.MUHAMMED MANIKFAN,S/O.K.V.ALI MANIKFAN,AGED 70 YEARS, R/AT 'SAJI MANSION, FUNHILOL VILLAGE, MINICORY ISLAND,UT OF LAKSHADWEEP 682 559. 2. ODIVALU KANJHARUGOTHI AMINA , D/O.MUHAMMED KUTTY,AGED 52 YEARS, ODIVALU KANJHARUGOTHI, BADA VILLAGE,MINICOY ISLAND,UT OF LAKSHADWEEP 682 559. BY ADVS. SRI.SHYAM PADMAN SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN SRI.S.K.SAJU SMT.M.LISHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MASJID ADMINISTRATION & SULLAMUSBIYAM MADRASSA COMMITTEE,JUMA MASJID,MINICOY ISLAND, UT OF LAKSHADWEEP 682 559,REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. LAKSHADWEEP STATE WAKF BOARD, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, SANTHI PATH ROAD,KAVARATTI- 682 555, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. F.G.HUSSAIN MOULAVI,AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.ALIBEBEGE MOOSA,FENGENNAGOTHI, BODUATHIRI VILLAGE,MINICOY ISLAND,UT OF LAKSHADWEEP 682 559. R1 BY SRI.ESM.KABEER R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,SC,LAKSHADWEEP ADMN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16763 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE MALAYALAM TRANSLATION OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ST RESPONDENT IN 1989. P2 : COPY OF THE AGRREMENT DATED 14.09.1995 IN FAVOUR OF 1ST PETITIONER REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.27/1995. P3 : COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 12.11.1994 IN FAVOUR OF 2ND PETITIONER REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.40/1994 P4 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.07.2009 IN WC 3/2009 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS. P5 : COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 11.02.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER P6 : COPY OF PETITION DATED 11.02.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. P7 : COPY OF NOTICE DATEAD 05.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE C.E.O. OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P8 : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15.03.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P9 : COPY OF NOTESOF ARGUMENTS DATED 21.03.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN WC 3/2009. P10 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN WC 3/2009 DATED 07.04.2011 P11 : COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION NO.2/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND ANOTHER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P12 : COPY OF THE ORDER IN WCRP 2/2011 DATED 02.06.2011 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT P13 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.06.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT P14 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.06.2011 TO SURRENDER VACANT POSSESSION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS. P15 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07.06.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P16 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07.06.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. WP(C).No. 16763 of 2011 P17 : COPY OF THE 2ND REPRESENTATION DATED 07.06.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT P18 : COPY OF THE 2ND REPRESENTATION DATED 07.06.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE smvd ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 16763 OF 2011 (U) ===================== Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and the standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. In the nature of the dispute raised, I do not think it necessary to put the 3rd respondent on notice and therefore, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with. 2. The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P10 and P12 orders passed by the 2nd respondent, which in effect orders eviction of the petitioners from the premises belonging to the 1st respondent, which is occupied by them. 3. As rightly pointed out by the counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, these orders are appealable to the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995. Although it is the contention of the petitioners that, since these orders are passed without jurisdiction, writ petition is the only remedy, since these orders are passed in the purported exercise of powers under the Wakf Act, 1995, an appeal is maintainable and it is for the appellate authority to deal with the contentions, including that WPC No. 16763/11 :2 : relating to jurisdiction. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to seek the appellate remedies against Exts.P10 and P12 under Section 83(2) before the Wakf Tribunal. In order to enable the petitioners to file the appeals as above, it is directed that further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P10 and P12 be kept in abeyance till 15th of September, 2011, before which date, the appeals shall be filed and appropriate interlocutory orders can be obtained. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp