BASHEER HAJI Vs. KERALA WAKF BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging Ext. P4 order issued by the wakf Board on the ground that the Wakf Board has no statutory authority to issue the said order. I heard counsel appearing for the petitioner, Standing counsel for the Wakf Board and counsel for the second respondent. Though notice is served on the third respondent, no one is representing him in this court.

(2.) EXT. P4 order is issued by the Wakf Board on complaint by the second respondent that he is virtually ex-communicated by the petitioner and he has not rendered any religious service by providing Khatheeb and Mukri for his daughter's marriage. The second respondent's case is that the Jama-ath committee has taken this attitude towards him only because his daughter's marriage with the close relative of third respondent Khasi fizzled out and second respondent after getting divorce of his daughter in civil court, got her remarried. It is reported that there were several litigations between second respondent and the relatives of third-respondent and many cases are decided in favour of the second respondent and many are still pending. I do not think there is any need to go into the dispute between the second respondent and relatives of third respondent because for the purpose of disposal of this W. P. this court has to consider only whether the Wakf Board is within their powers to issue EXT. P4 order. Counsel appearing for the Wakf Board and second respondent referred to S. 32 which gives general power of superintendence to wakf Board on all Wakfs and contended that even on religious matters Wakf Board has supervisory powers. Counsel for the petitioner on the other hand contended that these are matters which should be decided by civil court and not by the wakf Board. The powers vested in the Wakf Board under S. 32 and various other provisions have to be considered with reference to the composition of Wakf board which includes two members nominated by the State Government each of them being from recognized scholars in Islamic theology. All members of the Wakf board have to be members of the Muslim community. Even though powers and functions of the Board are detailed in S. 32 (2) the Section does not deal with supervisory function on religious matters is the argument of counsel for the petitioner. I do not think there is any necessity to specifically mention about religious matters in the Section because Wakf itself in many cases is constituted for religious purposes. In order to find out whether Wakf is functioning within it's objects and scheme, Wakf Board has to oversee religious matters administered by the Wakf. The other objects of Wakf other than religious matters should also be recognized by the religion as pious objectives. Therefore, supervisory power on religious matters is covered in the general power of superintendence and is an aspect of every other power left with the Wakf Board. Therefore, I have no doubt in my mind that the Wakf Board has plenary powers on the Wakfs over religious and other matters.