AHAMMED KABEER ANVARI Vs. KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Katheeb appointed at the Moonnackal Jama- ath Palli Mosque challenges his termination by Ext.P5 by the interim Mutawalli of the Mosque. The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed by Ext.P1 proceedings of the Chief Executive Officer of the Waqf Board. It is submitted that Ext.P2 order of suspension and Ext.P5 order appointing the 5th respondent as Katheeb are totally illegal and are violative of the principles of natural justice. It is further submitted that the 4th respondent, who was only an interim mutawalli, has no jurisdiction to issue orders in the nature of Exts.P2 and P5. It is further submitted that it was on imaginary and trumped up charges and without even serving a show cause notice that the orders of suspension and dismissal had been rendered against the petitioner.

(2.) A counter affidavit has been placed on record by respondents 1 and 3. It is stated that the Masjid in question is a Waqf. Since there were disputes with regard to the administration of the Waqf, an enquiry was conducted under Section 70 of the Waqf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and an interim mutawalli was appointed in terms of Section 63 of the Act. It is submitted that thereafter the 4th respondent was appointed as interim mutawalli by the Waqf Board. It is submitted that pursuant to Ext.P1, while the petitioner was continuing as Katheeb, complaints were received from the Mahal members by the interim mutawalli stating that a whatsapp group was started in the name of Moonnakkal Mahal and political propaganda was being aired on the said group. It is submitted that the interim mutawalli had required the petitioner to desist from such practices since as a Katheeb, his role was essentially spiritual in nature and that his activities were improper and illegal. It is stated that Katheeb was an exalted leadership position in Islamic faith and the role of the Katheeb was essentially spiritual in nature. It is, therefore, contended that the conduct of petitioner was ought to be unbecoming of a Katheeb and he had been placed under suspension and later replaced due to the opposition of the Mahal members. It is contended that an interim mutawalli appointed appointed to look after the day to day administration of the Wakf is fully empowered to take administrative decision necessary for a smooth functioning of the Wakf.

(3.) An additional counter affidavit was also filed stating that the 5th respondent had taken charge as Katheeb and had sought fixation of salary by Ext.R1(c) letter dated 06.07.2020.