C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R No.5008 of 2006 Date of decision : January 10, 2008 Harpal Singh, ...... Petitioner through Mr.Ashosk Singla,, Advocate v. Punjab Wakf Board, 50, Sardar Patel Marg, Ambala Cantt ...... Respondent through CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** RAJIVE BHALLA,J The petitioner, by way of the present petition, impugns the judgment and decree, dated 13.4.2006, passed by the learned Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar, whereby a suit for possession, filed by the respondent- Wakf Board, has been decreed. The Punjab Wakf Board filed a suit for possession asserting that the petitioner was an authorized occupant. Bahadur Singh, father of the petitioner, was a lessee. After his demise, the petitioner applied to the Wakf Board for transfer of lease in his name and filed an affidavit in respect thereof. The lease, in favour of the petitioner, was approved by the head office. However, the petitioner did not deposit the lease amount and despite repeated requests by the respondent-Board, calling upon the petitioner to C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::2:: pay the lease money, failed to do so. The petitioner contested the suit by asserting that jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal to entertain the suit was barred. The suit was not maintainable in the present form etc. On merits, it was submitted that the petitioner's late father Bahadur Singh was a tenant over the land in dispute and upon his demise, tenancy rights had devolved upon the petitioner as his son, Nand Kaur as his widow and Veero, as his daughter. As regards the execution of a fresh lease deed, execution thereof was denied. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues :- “1) Whether the plaintiff is owner of the land measuring 38K-12M i.e suit property ? OPP 2) Whether defendant is in illegal possession of the suit property ? OPP 3) Whether plaintiff is entitled to the decree for possession as prayed for ? OPP 4) Whether the suit has not been instituted by duly authorized person ? OPD 5) Whether the court has no jurisdiction to try the present suit ? 6) Whether the suit is not maintainable ? OPD 7) Whether the suit has not been correctly valued for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction ? OPD 8) Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties ? OPD 9) Relief.” C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::3:: Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribunal should have dismissed the suit, as it was not maintainable. The petitioner is admittedly a tenant over agricultural land. Disputes relating to ejectment of tenants over agricultural land are to be adjudicated, under the provisions of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887, a special statute that deals with rights and liabilities of landlords and tenants of agricultural land. It is further submitted that Section 76 of the aforementioned Act bars the jurisdiction of all Courts other than revenue officers from taking cognizance of any dispute regarding ejectment of an agricultural tenant. It is, therefore, asserted that as the Wakf Board had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, the present petition be accepted and the impugned judgment and decree be set aside, being null and void. On merits, it is asserted that as the petitioner's father was a tenant, and upon his demise, tenancy rights were inherited by the petitioner and, therefore, the suit for possession should have been dismissed. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned judgment and decree. The Wakf Act, 1995, enacted by Parliament to provide for better administration of Wakfs and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, came into force on 1.1.1996. Section 83 thereof reads as follows :- “83.Constitution of Tribunals, etc.- (1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a wakf or wakf property under this Act and C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::4:: define the local limits and jurisdiction under this Act of each of such Tribunals. (2) Any mutawalli person interested in a wakf or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act, or rules made thereunder, may make an application within the time specified in this Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed, to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf. (3) Where any application made under sub-section (1) relates to any wakf property which falls within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of two or more Tribunals, such application may be made to the Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the mutawalli or any one of the mutawallis of the wakf actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business or personally works for gain and, where any such application is made to the Tribunal aforesaid, the other Tribunal or Tribunals having jurisdiction shall not entertain any application for the determination of such dispute, question or other matter : Provided that the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of the wakf or any other person interested in the wakf or the wakf property to transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction for the determination of the C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::5:: dispute, question or other matter relating to such wakf or wakf property, transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction, and, on such transfer, the Tribunal to which the application is so transferred shall deal with the application from the stage which was reached before the Tribunal from which the application has been so transferred, except where the Tribunal is of opinion that it is necessary in the interests of justice to deal with the application afresh. (4) Every Tribunal shall consist of one person, who shall be a member of the State Judicial Service holding a rank, not below that of a District, Sessions or Civil Judge, Class I, and the appointment of every such person may be made either by name or by designation. (5) The Tribunal shall be deemed to be a civil court and shall have the same powers as may be exercised by a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit, or executing a decree or order. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the Tribunal shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (7) The decision of the Tribunal shall be final and binding upon the parties to the application and it shall have the force of a decree made by a civil court. (8) The execution of any decision of the Tribunal shall be made by the civil court to which such decision is sent C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::6:: for execution in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). (9) No appeal shall lie against any decision or order whether interim or otherwise, given or made by the Tribunal: Provided that a High Court may, on its own, motion or on the application of the Board or any person aggrieved, call for and examine the records relating to any dispute, question or other matter which has been determined by the Tribunal for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of such determination and may confirm, reverse or modify such determination or pass such other order as it may think fit.” Section 83(1) of the Wakf Act requires a State Government to constitute as many as Tribunals, as it thinks fit for determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a wakf or wakf property. The property in dispute is admittedly wakf property. The Wakf Act is a special statute dealing with disputes not only with respect to wakfs but also wakf properties. The Punjab Tenancy Act, on the other hand, is a statute that governs the rights and liabilities of landlords and tenants and prescribes a procedure for ejectment of tenants, whose tenures are not protected by the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. Section 76 of the Punjab Tenancy Act cannot be read to oust the operation of the Wakf Act and consequently the jurisdiction of the Wakf Tribunal to entertain and C.R No.5008 of 2006 ::7:: adjudicate disputes with respect to wakf property or any rights relating thereto. As regards the merits of the case, the petitioner has been in occupation of the property since 1996-97, without payment of a single penny. The petitioner has successfully perpetuated his illegal and unauthorized occupation of the property in dispute for the last about 10 years. The Kabuliatnama i.e the acceptance of the lease, Ex.P10, and the agreement, Ex.P12 clearly establish that the petitioner obtained the premises on lease from the Wakf Board. The petitioner has failed to place on record any document/receipt that would evidence the payment of rent. The Wakf Board apparently granted an opportunity to the petitioner to pay arrears of rent and in response, the petitioner undertook, by Ex.P13, to pay the lease money, by 19.10.2000, but he failed to deposit the lease money. The blatant manner, in which the petitioner has remained in possession of the property in dispute of the Wakf Board, without payment of the lease money, speaks volume of his ingenuity in perpetuating his illegal possession. The petitioner, who is an unauthorized occupant, has no right to retain the property in dispute. The learned Wakf Tribunal rightly decreed the suit. As the impugned judgment and decree does not suffer from any error of fact or of law as would merit interference by this Court, in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, the present petition is dismissed in limine. ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) January 10, 2008. JUDGE `kk'