THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6968 OF 2010 DATED:29.03.2010 Between: Mahabub Khan .. Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, rep., by its Chief Executive Officer, Office at Razzak Manzil, Nampally, Hyderabad and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6968 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner’s grand father was allegedly Muthawalli of Masjid-e-Mahdavi Pathan, a registered Wakf with considerable extents of Mashratul Khidmat (Wakf lands). After death of his grand father statedly petitioner’s father succeeded as Muthawalli. After his death, the first respondent took the Wakf in its direct management. The petitioner made a representation on 03.02.2003 after death of his father claiming him as a legal heir of Chammu Khan. It appears that he also sent reminders, in vain. In the meanwhile, on an application made by the second respondent, the first respondent by impugned order dated 02.09.2009 appointed him as Muthawalli of the subject institution under Section 63 of the Wakf Act, 1995 (the Act). Assailing the said order, the petitioner filed the instant Writ Petition after lapse of three months. It is mainly contended by the petitioner, which is also the main contention of the counsel, that the second respondent being a leaseholder of a portion of the Inam land in respect of land admeasuring Acs.07.35 guntas for a period of three years cannot be appointed as a permanent Muthawalli as per Section 64(1)(h) of the Act. The Writ Petition is opposed by the Standing Counsel for the Wakf Board raising a plea that the remedy available under Section 83(2) of the Act is a bar for entertaining the Writ Petition. Reliance is placed on the Division Bench judgment of Madras High Court in Salam Khan v T.N. Wakf Board Chennai[1]. In Salam Khan’s case, the Chief Justice, Markandey Katju (as his Lordships then was) considered the question whether a Writ Petition can be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in matters pertaining to Wakf ignoring Section 83 of the Act. It was held that the party should first approach Wakf Tribunal. The relevant observations are as follows. … Thus, the Wakf Tribunal can decide all disputes, questions or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property. The words “any dispute, question or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property” are, in our opinion, words of very wide connotation. Any dispute, question or other matters whatsoever and in whatever manner which arises relating to a Wakf or Wakf property can be decided by the Wakf Tribunal. The word ‘Wakf’ has been defined in Section 3(r) of the Wakf Act, 1995 and hence once the property is found to be a Wakf property as defined in Section 3(r), then any dispute, question or other matter relating to it should be agitated before the Wakf Tribunal. It is not proper for this Court to straightway entertain writ petitions relating to a Wakf or Wakf property when there is a special Tribunal constituted for this purpose. ... … We may, further, clarify that the party can approach the Wakf Tribunal, even if no order has been passed under the Act. It may be mentioned that Sections 83(1) and 84 of the Act do not confine the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal to the determination of the correctness or otherwise of an order passed under the Act. No doubt Section 83(2) refers to the orders passed under the Act, but, in our opinion, Sections 83 (1) and 84 of the Act are independent provisions, and they do not require an order to be passed under the Act before invoking the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal. Hence, it cannot be said that a party can approach the Wakf Tribunal only against an order passed under the Act. In our opinion, even if no order has been passed under the Act, the party can approach the Wakf Tribunal or the determination of any dispute, question or other matters relating to a Wakf or Wakf property, as the plain language of Sections 83(1) and 84 indicate. We are further of the opinion that even if an order has been passed prior to the commencement of the Wakf Act, 1995, or a dispute, question or matter has arisen before the commencement of the said Act, the Wakf Tribunal can adjudicate such issues or questions or the correctness of such an order because the intention of Parliament in enacting Wakf Act, 1995 is that any dispute or matter pertaining to Wakf should go before the Wakf Tribunal. Furthermore, the Standing Counsel also brought to the notice of this Court to the three Division Bench judgments of this Court in M.Bikshapathi v Government of Andhra Pradesh[2], Allauddin Charities and Zakath Wakf v Hameed Ali[3] and Syed Muneer v Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Hyderabad[4] wherein the Division Benches held similarly. Standing Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Jai Bharat Co-operative Housing Society Limited v Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board.[5] In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the State Wakf Board and thereafter he has an effective remedy of filing the revision under Section 83(2) of the Act. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 29.03.2010 Note:- Furnish C.C. by 06.04.2010. (B/o) KH [1] AIR 2005 MADRAS 241 [2] 1999 (6) ALD 270 (DB) [3] 2002 (1) ALD 67 (DB) [4] 2001 (4) ALD 430 (DB) [5] 2000 (5) ALD 743