KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKF Vs. MASJID-E HABEEN NABI KHANA SHAIK ROZA MADARSA DINI DARUL-ULOOM OSMANIA JUNAID NAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) THE facts briefly stated are as follows:

(3.) IT is pertinent to note that Ex.P1 the registration certificate, on the basis of which the court below has accepted the claim of the plaintiff, as to the plaintiff being the president of a managing committee, was not an order of appointment of any Managing Committee. On the other hand any such constitution and appointment of a managing committee requires a set procedure prescribed under the Karnataka Wakf Rules 1997, to be followed and any such order of appointment of a committee is evidenced by such an order as at Ex.D3 which requires to be published. There is no such independent order of appointment or constitution of a committee in so far as the plaintiff was concerned, that was available on record. On the other hand it is also to be noticed that the administration of a Wakf would be in terms of a deed of Wakf, if such a deed is available or otherwise it would be covered under the provisions of the Wakf Act. The Wakf properties would vest in the Wakf Board and it is the Wakf Board which would have the absolute power of appointment, administration and management of the Wakf and Wakf properties. In so far as the plaintiff is concerned, except his self-serving statement that the property was his ancestral property and that he was the president of a managing committee and the mutuwally. There is no such deed or other order that is produced. In so far as the Ex.D3 is concerned, as already stated, it is the order by which the Managing Committee consisting of respondent Nos.2 to 10 was appointed and duly approved by the Wakf Board and it is also published by way of a public notice and the term of that managing committee was for a period of three years from 21.06.2007. In fact the term of that committee had expired as on the date of the judgment of the Tribunal, in the suit filed by the plaintiff. This aspect of the matter has not been addressed by the Tribunal at all. The very suit prayer was infructous as there was no Committee in place in the light of the expiry of the term. And in the absence of any extension granted by the Wakf Board in so far as that managing committee is concerned.