77 Of committee, North Bastar, Kanker, aged 49 years, son of Haji Shakoor, R/o ShitSapara, Kanker, District 1 l^-^-J- Chhattisgarh. Waqt Sector-3, C-12, Devendre Raiour soarct, m m .I^.U.J r^'. ^\:hair person, Chhattisgarh ioard, Secfor-3, 'vendra Nagar, Raipur [C.G.] C-- /^-Ut^ ^/IIE^t ChJ- irh Si r^ ')'•? \^~ S £. irtive Officer, ate Waqf Board, Devendra Nagar, Raipur [C.G.] ^^iL-t^?-^:- y"?^1/^! wOti'QCIOF, !\3HKQf. Asslstant Waqf Commissl Chhattisgarh State Waqf i rc.G.1 .D.0., [Revenue] Nori:h Bastar, Kanker [C.G.]. Present: Smt. Fouzia Mirza, counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.L. Dernbi'n, 'earned counsel for respondent No. (Passed on 31 July, 2006) !n this writ petition, the order of the Chief Executive Officer, irh State Wakf Board, fhe 3rd respondent herein, marked as Annexture-P/S, dated 25.05.2006 removing the petitioner from the office of Mutawaiii has been assailed, among other grounds, on the ground that the impugned order was passed by the 3 respondenf without conductini inquiry envisaged under Sccfcn_71_flUbeJflfaW-AFt, 1995 (for short 'the Act') with sufc-Section (3) of Section 64 of the Act. Section 64 of the Act deals with remova! of Mutawalli. A Mutawalii can be removed from his office on the grounds in Ciauses (a) to (k) of sub-Section (1) of Section 64 of the Act. Sub-Section (3) of Section 64 the Act that no action sha!) be taken to remove a Mutawalli uniess the or its delegate has held an enquify into the matter in the prescribed manner and the declsion has been taken by the majority of the not t'nan two-third of the members of the Section 71 pt'escribes the procedure to be fojiovred in conducting the enquir^'. Sub-Section (2) of Section 71 provides that for the purpose of an enquiry under Section 71, the Board or any person authorfeed by it in that behalf, shall have the same powers as are vested in a civii Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for enforc.ing ttie attendance of witnesses and production of documents. in the present case, except issuing notice to the petitioner to exptein his conduct with regard to certain jrreguiarities, admitSedty, no enqujry as envisaged under Section 71 of the Act has been held before the impugnsd order was removing the pentioner from the office of the Mutav/aitf. Since the impugned order v/as in vioiation of the mandatory )rovisions of sub-Section (3) ofSection 64 ofthe Act, the same cannot be sustained in law. The writ petition is, therefore, aiiowsd. The impugned order is quashed. No costs. However, this order not come in the way of the Board or the 3 respondent taking appropriats steps agalnst the petitioner in accordance with !aw. Sd/- ChlefJustice ^ v