IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 CRP.No. 338 of 2010() --------------------- WOS.15/2010 of WAKF TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------------- M.P.SHANAVAS @ NAWAS,AGED 42, S/O.MR.PAREED,RESIDING AT MANAKANDATHIL HOUSE, PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(PO),ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI CHIRAYATH SRI.T.S.RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. PERUMATTOM MUSLIM JAMA-ATH,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(PO), VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-686 691. 2. KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD,OFFICE OF THE KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD,VIP ROAD,KALLOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-682017,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 3. MUHAMMED HASHIM.A,ADVOCATE,RETURNING OFFICER,ELECTION FOR MANAGING COMMITTEE,ALISON PLAZA,KALADY ROAD,PERUMBAVOOR,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 542. 4. T.M.ALI,AGED 37,S/O.MR.KUNUU MOHAMMED, THAIKUDILY HOUSE,PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(P.O), VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUAVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-686 691. 5. T.M.JALAUDHEEN,AGED 35,S/O.MR.MUSTHAFA, THOPPIKUDY HOUSE,PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(PO), VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-686691. 6. JAMAL.P.P,AGED 36,S/O.MR.PAREEKUTTY, VILAKKATH HOUSE,PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(PO), VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-686 691. 7. K.M.ASHRAF,AGED 40,S/O.MR.MUHAMMED LABBA KUNNASSERY HOUSE,SECRETARY,PERUMATTOM MUSLIM JAMA-ATH,PERUMATTOM,PUTHUPADY(PO),VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686691. 8. K.M.KOCHUMUHAMMED,AGED 50,S/O.MR.MOIDEEN PRESIDENT,PERUMATTOM MUSLIM JAMA-ATH,PERUMATTOM, PUTHUPADY(PO),VELLURKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-686 691. ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED PUZHAKKARA THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ C.R.P.No.338 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2010 O R D E R Abdul Rehim, J. Challenge in this revision petition is against an interlocutory order of the Wakf Tribunal passed on an application filed by the petitioner seeking injunction restraining the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Kerala Wakf Board from conducting elections to the managing committee of the 1st respondent, which was scheduled on 6th June 2010. The revision petitioner who is the plaintiff before the Wakf Tribunal claims to be a member of the Jama-ath. The Advocate Commissioner was appointed through Annexure 3 order issued as early as on 12th April, 2010. The Wakf Board issued that order on a petition filed by respondents 4 to 6 herein who were former members of the managing committee. The respondents before the Wakf Tribunal are, the Jama-ath committee, its President and Secretary. Both parties before the Wakf Board consented to have fresh elections conducted through a returning CRP.No.338/2010 2 officer, as per procedure prescribed in the bye laws of the Wakf. 2. On a perusal of the plaint filed before the Wakf Tribunal(Annexure A9) we notice that the foremost prayer is to declare Annexure 3 Order of the Wakf Board as not binding on the members of the Jama-ath. The interim application from which the impugned order arises was filed seeking an injunction virtually against operation of the order of the Wakf Board. 3. Heard Sri.Shaji Chirayath, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, Sri.P.K.Muhammed Puzhakkara, counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 6 and Sri. O.V.Maniprasad counsel for respondents 1, 7 and 8. First of all, we notice that under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995 any Muthuvally or a person interested in a Wakf, if aggrieved by any order passed by the Wakf Board, has got a right of appeal before the Wakf Tribunal. It is by-passing such a remedy that the revision petitioner had filed a suit, virtually seeking a declaration to nullify the order of the Wakf Board. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the order of the Wakf Board can be treated as an order issued under Section 32(3) and CRP.No.338/2010 3 that a suit is maintainable before the Tribunal against such order. On a perusal of Section 32(3) we could not agree with such an argument. Section 32(3) deals with matters pertaining to settlement of scheme and also with respect to matters provided under Section 32(2)(e) of the Act. Direction for conduct of election will not come within the purview of Section 32(3). When there is a specific remedy by way of appeal is provided in order to challenge an order of the Wakf Board, an indirect approach before the Wakf Tribunal by filing a suit seeking to nullify any such order is not at all maintainable. 4. Further, we notice that the elections has already taken place on 6/6/2010, in compliance with Annexure A3 order of the Wakf Board. We further notice that by virtue of the impugned order, the Tribunal had clarified that publishing of results of the elections will be subject to final result of the interim application. Under such circumstances, we do not find any ground warranting interference with the impugned order of the Wakf Tribunal. 5. However, it is clarified that dismissal of this revision petition or any of the observations contained herein may not be CRP.No.338/2010 4 taken note of by the Wakf Tribunal while deciding the interlocutory application or the suit pending. The revision petition is dismissed with the above observations. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE dpk