IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 27216 of 2010(B)
1. K.C.ABDUL KHADER, S/O.SYEDMOHAMMED,AGED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KARATTUPALLI MUSLIM JAMA-ATH,REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. K.A.MUHAMMED,S/O.ABOOBACKER,VICE
3. O.M.HAMZA,S/O.MUSTHAFA,SECRETARY,
4. K.P.KASIM,S/O.PAREETH,KARAKUNNAN HOUSE,
5. K.A.ABDUL RAHIMAN,KAROLI HOUSE,
6. M.F.JALALUDHEEN,MULLAKKAL HOUSE,
7. V.B.MAHIN,S/O.BAVA,VARIKKADAN HOUSE,
8. P.H.SHANAVAS,S/O.HASSAN HAJI,PARAYIL
9. K.S.MOHAMMED KUNJU,S/O.SULAIMAN,
10. K.K.ALI,S/O.KOCHAHAMMED,KONNAMKUDI HOUSE
11. KERALA WAKF BOARD,REPRESENTED BY ITS
For Petitioner :SRI.M.P.MOHAMMED ASLAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :07/09/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 27216 OF 2010 (B)
=====================
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The issue raised in this writ petition is a dispute between the
beneficiaries of a Wakf. The issue is pending consideration of the
Wakf Board in OP 16/2010, which is filed for framing a scheme. In
the OP, the petitioner has filed IA 68/10 praying for orders to
oversee the election to the Wakf. IA 87/10 is also filed by the
petitioner for a direction to the Wakf Board for restoring the
alleged practice of sermon that was delivered on Fridays. In this
writ petition, what the petitioner mainly seeks is a direction to the
Wakf Board to consider IA 87/10 and pass orders thereon.
2. I heard the standing counsel appearing for the 11th
respondent and Sri.T.H.Abdul Aziz appearing for respondents 4 to
10. Standing counsel informs me that the IA was posted on 4th of
August and 18th of August 2010 and that however the IA could not
be heard and that it is now posted to 14th of September, 2010. It
is also disclosed that the OP itself stands posted to 26/11/2010.
On the other hand, the counsel for the party respondents submit
that they sought impleadment in the proceedings, but however,
WPC No. 27216/10
:2 :
orders have not been passed, as a result of which, they could not
file objection to the IA in question. In such circumstances, the only
direction that is possible is that the Wakf Board shall consider IA
87/10 at the earliest possible opportunity, once the pleadings are
complete. There will be a direction to that effect.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction for
the Wakf Board to ensure that the court orders are complied with.
As rightly pointed out by the counsel for the Board, in such a
case, it is open to the petitioner to move the Wakf Board, and if
so moved, I have no doubt that the Wakf Board will not take
cognizance of such application and pass appropriate orders
thereon. It is pointed out that Ext.P6 filed by the petitioner is
pending consideration of the Wakf Board. If that be so, the Wakf
Board will take appropriate action on Ext.P6 also.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp