LAWS(KER)-1994-2-61

P.A. SULAIMAN Vs. MANAGING COMMITTEE AND OTHERS

Decided On February 21, 1994
P.A. Sulaiman Appellant
V/S
Managing Committee And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the additional 7th respondent in O.P. 11389 of 1994. The Original Petition was filed by respondents 1 to 13 challenging the proceedings Ext. P-4 and Ext. P-5 order of the Kerala Wakf Board. For the sake of convenience, the position of the parties as it stood before the learned Single Judge is followed in the discussion hereunder.

(2.) The Wakf Board in suo motu proceedings appointed petitioners 2, to 13 and 4th respondent as members of the Managing Committee of the Jumaath Mosque by proceedings dated 15-12-1992.-The Mosque belongs to Hanafi Jumaath. It was managed on the basis of a scheme framed by the Wakf Board. As per the scheme as amended, the Wakf Board had to appoint thirteen Hanafi Muslims to constitute the Managing Committee of the mosque. As the term of the earlier Managing Committee expired, the Wakf Board appointed petitioners 2 to 13 and 4th respondent in accordance with the scheme. Contention of the petitioners is that all of them have the qualifications prescribed in the scheme framed by the Board, that they were hanafi muslims at the time of their appointment as members of the Managing Committee, that they were Hanafi muslims prior thereto and that they continue to be Hanafi muslims thereafter. While they were administering the mosque on the basis of their appointments as per Ext. P-1, the Wakf Board issued proceedings dated 7-7-1993 dissolving the Committee and directing the second respondent (Secretary, Kerala Wakf Board) to take charge of the administration of the mosque. The order was challenged by filing O.P. 9472 of 1993. this Court by Judgment dated 20-8-1993 set aside the said order making it clear that it is open to the Board to take a decision afresh after giving notice to the members of the Managing Committee. On 11-9-1993 the Board issued show cause notice to the members of the Managing Committee. They gave their explanation, Ext. P-3 asserting that they are Hanafi muslims and that they follow the Hanafi School of Thought. It appears that the whole controversy was raised by the issuance of a notice by one Sulaiman alleging that the newly appointed members of the Committee are not Hanafi muslims. The Board after hearing the members of the Managing Committee passed Ext. P-4 order dated 9-8-1994 dissolving the Committee and assuming the management and administration of the mosque. The Board also issued a direction Ext. P5 dated 11-8-1994 to the 6th petitioner to hand over the records, accounts cash if any, etc. to the second respondent. Ext. P-4 order and Ext. P-5 notice ware challenged by the petitioner in the O.P.

(3.) Respondents 1 and 2 contended that members of the Committee were nominated under Ext. P-1 by the Board on the assumption that all of them were eligible to be nominated as members of the Committee, that it was found out that petitioners 1,3,5 to 11 and 4th respondent were not eligible to be nominated as they did not belong to Hanafi Madhab and that the mosque being a Hanafi one and as Ext. P-2 postulates that all the members of the Committee except the Board's representatives shall be Hanafi muslims from the area of the Corporation of Cochin it was found really necessary to take over the administration of the mosque pending the constitution of a committee in accordance with the scheme of administration. It is also contended that mere assertion of the members of the Committee that they belong to Hanafi Madhab is hot sufficient to hold that they can continue as the Committee members and as they did not produce proof that they belong to Hanafi sect, there is no infirmity in Exts. P-4 and P-5. As regards the 10th petitioner it was contended that he could not produce any evidence to show that he is a resident within the area of the Corporation of Cochin and so he cannot be a member of the Committee in violation of the specific terms in Ext. P-2.