1
Court No. 1
Writ Petition No. 3573 (MB) of 2010
Managing Committee of Waqf Dargah Meera Shah
Rahmatullah Alaeh and another
Vs.
U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqf, Lucknow
and others.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.
Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today be placed on record.
Heard the counsel for the petitioners Sri B.Q. Siddiqui, Sri Akhlaq
Ali for opposite party no. 3 and Sri Mohd. Saeed for the Waqf Board.
With the consent of the parties’ counsel the writ petition is being
disposed of finally at the admission stage.
The petitioners’ claim that they were the duly appointed Committee
of Management but by the impugned order, they have been ousted by
constituting a new Committee under the orders of one of the Members of
the Board, who has exercised his delegated powers of the Board.
Arguments have been advanced at great length by the counsel for
the parties and we find that the order has been passed only on two grounds,
namely, (i) an F.I.R has been lodged against the petitioner in pursuance of
an order passed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. levelling charges of
embezzlement etc.; and (ii) the Waqf property, namely, the Madarsa, is
being run by the aforesaid Waqf, for which, for the reason given in the
order, Committee should be constituted in a manner so that educationally
qualified persons are inducted in the said Committee.
It is not in dispute that in regard to the First Information Report,
final report was submitted by the police, in which it was said that because of
group rivalry the F.I.R. has been lodged and there is no evidence to
substantiate the charge. This was the position at the time of passing of the
order.
We are informed by the counsel for the opposite party no. 3 that later
on, on protest application being given, the case has been registered. This has
been done on 18.2.2010 i.e. after passing of the impugned order.
Since on the date of passing of the order, there was no material
before the Member to draw any adverse inference against the present
2
petitioners and simply because an F.I.R. was lodged, the order could not
have been passed on that ground, unless there was something more in
support of the charge, for which the F.I.R. was lodged and the Member had
applied his mind on such relevant facts also.
The other ground that since the Waqf property, included the
Madarsa, therefore, educationally qualified persons should be appointed in
the Committee, is also not tenable for the reason that there is nothing on
record to show that the waqf deed ever required any educational
qualification for being appointed in the Committee.
Counsel for the Waqf Board has submitted that, in fact, there there
no Madarsa in the Waqf property but it is only the Mazaar, for which the
dispute was raised.
In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that none of
the two grounds can be sustained.
We, therefore, set aside the order dated 29.9.09. Liberty is, however,
given to the concerned authority to pass fresh orders, in accordance with
law, after affording opportunity to the parties concerned.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Dated: 10.5.2010
MFA