C.R.No.6805 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M.No.27377-CII of 2009 and C.R.No.6805 of 2009 Date of Decision 27.11.2009 Om Parkash ........ Petitioner Versus Haryana Wakf Board, Ambala Cantt. ........ Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr.R.S.Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) C.M.No.27377-CII of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. C.R.No.6805 of 2009 The challenge in the present revision is to the order passed by the learned Wakf Tribunal on 13.12.2008, decreeing the suit for possession filed by the respondent and for recovery of mesne profits. It is the case of the petitioner that he had taken the property on rent at the rate of Rs.75/- per month as a tenant vide allotment order dated 29.3.1986. Subsequently, the Wakf Board has sought a decree for possession after the expiry of tenancy period of 11 months. Notice was also issued to the petitioner on 29.3.2005, terminating his tenancy and asking him to hand over the property and to pay the mesne profits at the rate of Rs.100/- per month. It is the said suit which has been decreed by the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, (for short 'the Act') the Wakf Tribunal C.R.No.6805 of 2009 -2- has no jurisdiction to entertain an application for possession from the Wakf Board and that the petitioner was inducted as a tenant, therefore, the petitioner can be evicted only in terms of the provision of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. I do not find any merit in the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sub-section (2) of Section 83 of the Act, confers the right upon the Wakf Board or any other person interested in the wakf to make an application for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf. Since the property is of the wakf, as the petitioner was inducted as tenant by the Wakf Board, therefore, the Tribunal constituted in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 83 of the Act, was competent to determine all disputes and questions relating to the wakf property. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be said to be illegal or without jurisdiction. The Wakf Act, 1995, is a special and a central statute dealing with the wakf property. The Act is a complete Code in itself and deals with the resolution of the disputes and the machinery for resolving such disputes including the execution of such orders. Therefore, the Rent Controller, under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, a State law, will not have jurisdiction to entertain the dispute between the parties. In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the Wakf Tribunal, which may warrant interference by this Court in the present revision petition. Dismissed. November 27, 2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) rishu JUDGE