1 C.R.A.223.07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 223 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11865 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 223 OF 2007 1. Hamiduddin Chiraguddin Kazi Age: 70 Years, 2. Sayyad Mohammad Sayyad Chand, Age : 65 Years. 3. Abdulbhai Abulaziz Kureshi, Age : 71 Years, All Occupation Agril. and Business, All R/o Naikwadi Mohalla, Shevgaon Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. Chairman Maharashtra State Board of Wakf R/o Majestic MLA Hostel Room No. 309/310 Third Floor , Kulaba, Mumbai 400 039. 2. Mohammad Salauddin S/o Bahuddin Kazi Age : 28 Years, R/o Aurangabad, District Aurangabad. 3. Mohd Bahuddin S/o Ziyauddin Kazi Age : 60 years R/o Aurangabad, District Aurangabad. 2 C.R.A.223.07 4. Wakf Board of Maharashtra Through its Chief Executive Officer at Pawanchakki, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.R.R.Mantri,Advocate for Applicants. Mr.S.B.Khan,Advocate holding for Mr.MBW Khan,Advocate for respondent Nos.1 & 4 Mrs.Anajli Dube, Advocate for Respondent NO.3. Mr.S.B.Talekar,Advocate holding for Mr.H.A.Joshi,Advocate for Respondent No.3 ... WITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 217 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3301 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 217 OF 2007 . Mohammad Salauddin S/o Bahuddin Kazi Age : 31 Years, Occup. Religous Functionary R/o Shevgaon, Taluka Shevgaon District Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1. Hamiduddin Chiraguddin Kazi Age: 70 Years,Occup: Agriculture, 2. Sayyad Mohammad Sayyad Chand, Age : 65 Years.Occupation: Agriculture. 3. Abdulbhai Abulaziz Qureshi, Age : 71 Years,Occup.: Agriculture, Resondent Nos.1 to 3 r/o Shevgaon Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. 3 C.R.A.223.07 4. Chairman Maharashtra State Board of Wakf R/o Majestic MLA Hostel Room No. 309/310 Third Floor, Kulaba, Mumbai-39. 5. Mohd Bahuddin S/o Ziyauddin Kazi Age : 60 years R/o Aurangabad, District Aurangabad. 6. Wakf Board of Maharashtra Through its Chief Executive Officer at Pawanchakki, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS .... Mr.P.G.Deshmukh,Advocate holding for Mr.A.M.Awate,Advocate for Applicants. Mr.S.B.Talekar,Advocate holding for Mr.H.A.Joshi,Advocate for Respondent No.5 .... WITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 222 OF 2007 Kazi Mohammad Raisuddin S/o Kazi Mohammad Masleuddin, Age : 65 Years, Occup.: Mutwalli & Kazi R/o Kazi Mohalla Shevgaon Ta. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1. Chairman Maharashtra State Board of Wakf R/o Majestic MLA Hostel Room No. 309/310 Third Floor , Kulaba, Mumbai- 39. 4 C.R.A.223.07 2. Chief Executive officer, Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Panchakki Aurangabad. 3. Mohd Bahuddin S/o Ziyauddin Kazi Age : Major Occup.: Govt. Servant R/o Aurangabad, 4. Mohammad Salauddin S/o Bahuddin Kazi Age : Major Occup. Service R/o Taklkar Society, Baijipura, Aurangabad. 5. Hamiduddin Chiraguddin Kazi Age: Major,Occup: Nil, R/o Shevgaon Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. 6. Sayed Mohammad Sayed Chand, Age : Major, Occup.: Service, R/o as above. 7. A. A. Qureshi, Age : Major Occup.: Service, R/o as above. 8. Nazeruddin S/o Rahimuddin Kazi, Age : 50 Years, Occup.: Agril & Printing R/o Lotakaranja Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.Gulam Dastagir Shaikh,Advocate for Applicants. Mr.S.B.Khan,Advocate holding for Mr.MBW Khan,Advocate for Respondent NO.2 Mrs.Anajli Dube, Advocate for Respondent NO.3. Mr.S.B.Talekar,Advocate holding for Mr.H.A.Joshi,Advocate for Respondent No.3 Mr.R.R.Shaikh,Advocate for Respondent NO.4. 5 C.R.A.223.07 ... WITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 233 OF 2007 . Mohammad Salauddin S/o Bahuddin Kazi Age : 31 Years Occup. Religious Functionary R/o Shevgaon Tq. Shevgaon. District Ahmednagar. ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1. Kazi Mohammad Raisuddin S/o Kazi Mohammad Masleuddin, Age : 66 Years, Occup.: Mutwalli & Kazi R/o Kazi Mohalla Shevgaon Ta. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar 2. Chairman Maharashtra State Board of Wakf R/o Majestic MLA Hostel Room No. 309/310 Third Floor , Kulaba, Mumbai- 39. 3. Chief Executive officer, Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Panchakki Aurangabad. 4. Mohd. Bahauddin S/o Ziyauddin Kazi Age : 60 Years, Occup.: Business, R/o Naikwadi Mohalla, Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. 5. Hamiduddin Chiraguddin Kazi Age: 70 years,Occup: Agril, R/o as above. 6 C.R.A.223.07 6. Sayed Mohammad Sayed Chand, Age : 65 Years, Occup.: Service, R/o as above. 7. A. A. Qureshi, Age : 55 Years, Occup. Service, R/o Shivaji Chowk, Kasi Mohalla, Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. 8. Nazeruddin S/o Rahimuddin Kazi, Age : 51 Years, Occup.: Agril & Printing R/o Lotakaranja Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS .... Mr.P.G.Deshmukh,Advocate holding for Mr.A.M.Awate,Advocate for Applicants. Mr.G.D.Shaikh,Advocate for Respondent NO.1 Mr.G.R.Sayed,Advocate holding for Mr.Y.B.Pathan,Advocate for Respondent NO.3. Mr.S.B.Talekar,Advocate holding for Mr.H.A.Joshi,Advocate for Respondent No.4 .... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 12TH OCTOBER, 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : . The Civil Revision Application Nos. 223 of 2007 and 217 of 2007 takes exception to the judgment and order dated 24.09.2007, passed by the Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No. 05 of 2006. 7 C.R.A.223.07 2. The Civil Revision Application Nos. 222 of 2007 and 233 of 2007 takes exception to the judgment and order dated 24.09.2007, passed by the Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No. 04 of 2006. 3. Mr.R.R.Mantri,learned counsel appearing for the revision applicants( in CRA No.223 of 2007) would submit that the appeal filed by the revision applicants was maintainable, however, the learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad has wrongly rejected the appeal. . The learned counsel for the applicants in the alternative, submitted that if at all the appeal is not maintainable, and if the application under sub-section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act is maintainable, in that case the Tribunal in all fairness should have told the applicants to convert the appeal into application under sub- section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act. Therefore, according to the learned counsel 8 C.R.A.223.07 appearing for the revision applicants, the Civil Revision Applications deserve to be allowed. However, in the alternative the learned counsel Mr.R.R.Mantri, appearing for the revision applicants submit that the if respondents have no objection, if revision applicants are allowed to file applications a fresh under sub-section 2 of the section 83 of the Wakf Act before the Tribunal, and if they do not oppose prayer for condonation of delay in filing such applications, in that case Revision Applicants will file fresh application under sub-section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act to agitate their grievances and to seek relief in terms of prayers which were incorporated in Appeal No. 5 of 2006 filed by the revision applicants. 4. Mr.S.B.Khan, learned counsel appearing for respective respondent Nos. 1 and 4 also submit that they have no objection if the applicants are allowed to file fresh applications under sub- section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act, to 9 C.R.A.223.07 agitate their grievances, which were agitated in Appeal No. 05 of 2006. He further submits that, respective respondent Nos. 1 and 4 will not oppose the prayer of the revision applicants for condonation of delay. 5. Mrs. Anajli Dube, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 also submits that respondent No.2 has no objection if the applicants are allowed to file fresh applications under sub- section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act, and if the applicants agitate their grievances or prayers in Appeal No. 5 of 2006 before the Tribunal. It is further submitted that respondent No.2 will not oppose the prayer for condonation of delay in the said application. 6. Mr. Talekar, learned counsel instructed by Mr. H.H.Joshi, learned counsel appearing for respondent NO. 3 fairly stated that, he has no objection if the revision applicants are allowed to file fresh application under sub-section 2 of 10 C.R.A.223.07 the section 83 of the Wakf Act and to agitate their grievances, which were originally agitated in Appeal No. 05 of 2006, and respondent No.3 will not oppose prayer of delay condonation in filing the said application. 7. I have given due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. There is no any impediment to accept the statements of the learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents, that revision applicants can file fresh application under sub-section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act to agitate their grievances which were originally raised in the Appeal No. 05 of 2006 and prayers therein. The counsel appearing for all the respondents submits that, they will not oppose the prayer for condonation of delay in the said application. 8. In that view of the matter, the judgment and order dated 24.09.2007, passed by the learned 11 C.R.A.223.07 Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No. 05 of 2006 deserves to be set aside and accordingly same stands quashed and set aside. The learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad is directed to entertain the applications of the revision applicants, which will be filed by them under sub- section 2 of the Section 83 of the Wakf Act, without insisting for “sufficient cause” to be disclosed for condonation of delay. In short, the Wakf Tribunal shall consider the said application on merits. 9. Mr.R.R.Mantri, learned counsel appearing for the revision applicants, on instruction from his clients makes a statement that, such applications under sub-section 2 of section 83 of the Wakf Act will be filed by the revision applicants on or before 21st October, 2011. 10. It is needless to observe that the parties to the said applications, which will be filed by 12 C.R.A.223.07 the revision applicants will have liberty to lead the evidence in support of their contentions and also put forth their contentions before the Tribunal. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. 11. The learned counsel appearing for the respective parties in Civil Revision Applications jointly submit that any observation made in the impugned judgment and order of the Tribunal should not come in the way of the parties in future. It is clarified that, any observations made in the impugned judgment and order and in this order will not come in the way of parties. 12. This Court expressed gratitude for effective assistance of the respective counsels appearing for the respective parties for quick disposal of Civil Revision Applications. 13. The Civil Revision applications are disposed of accordingly on above terms. 13 C.R.A.223.07 14. Mr. G.D.Shaikh,Learned counsel appearing for the applicants in Civil Revision Application No. 222 of 2007 submits that the said Civil Revision Application can also be decided finally in terms of order passed in Civil Revision Application No. 223 of 2007. 15. Mr.P.G.Deshmukh, Learned counsel appearing for the applicants in Civil Revision Application No. 233 of 2007 submits that the said Civil Revision Application can be decided finally in terms of order passed in Civil Revision Application No. 223 of 2007. 16. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels for revisions applicants and respective respondents in Civil Revision Application Nos. 222 of 2007 and 233 of 2007 the judgment and order dated 24.09.2007, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No. 04 of 2006 deserves to be set aside and accordingly same 14 C.R.A.223.07 stands quashed and set aside for the same reasons which are assigned by this Court while disposing of Civil Revision Application No. 223 of 2006. . All the Civil Revision Applications are disposed of accordingly. Rule made absolute in above terms in all Civil Reivision Applications. In view of disposal of Civil Revision Applications all pending Civil Applications in respective Civil Revision Applications stand disposed off. Sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] MTK