ADAM ABOOBACKER SAIT Vs. KERALA WAKF BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises is whether or not the Board of Wakfs (the 'Board') established under the Wakf Act, 1954 (the 'Act') can adjudicate upon questions relating to the validity of appointment of a Managing Trustee of a mutawalli. The Board by the impugned order (Ext. P4 dated 17-11-79) upheld the contention of respondents 2 to 4 that the petitioner Adam Aboobacker Sait was not qualified to be appointed as the Managing Trustee of the mutawalli. Accordingly the Board held that the appointment of the petitioner to that office was illegal. The Board further held that the 2nd respondent was eligible to be appointed as the Managing Trustee.

(2.) Challenging Ext. P4, the petitioner's counsel Shri Kelu Nambiar submits that in the first place the Board had no jurisdiction to examine the validity of appointment to the office of Managing Trustee and secondly the construction of the relevant provision of the instrument of wakf on the basis of which the Board reached its conclusion was wrong.

(3.) I shall first examine the question of jurisdiction. Appearing for the 2nd respondent, Shri K. P. G. Menon submits in his well prepared arguments that the Board is armed with sufficient statutory power to adjudicate upon rival claims for appointment to the office of a mutawalli or the Managing Trustee of a mutawalli. Counsel refers to S.15, 42, 44 and 45 of the Act in support of his contention. Shri Menon is supported by counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4. The Board's counsel submits that Ext. P4 was made exclusively in terms of S.15(2)(o).