THORAYIL JUMA MASJID M COMMITTEE Vs. WAKF BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Wakf Tribunals have been set up under the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the determination of disputes, questions and other matters relating to Wakf and Wakf property. The Act also contemplates the Tribunal to act as an appellate authority in certain circumstances prescribed under the Aet. Powers of superintendence over the Wakfs is conferred on the Wakf Board. Whether an order passed by the Wakf Board in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under Section 72(7) of the Act is liable to be challenged before the Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 as a dispute, question or matter relating to wakf is the issue to be considered in this case.

(2.) Petitioner is the petitioner in O.P. 3/2004 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode. The Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board issued a demand notice directing payment to the tune of Rs. 2,50,094/- as contribution for the years 1994-95 to 2001-02, after due assessment under Section 72 of the Act. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Wakf Board, under Section 72(7). The appeal was disposed of by the Wakf Board remanding the matter for fresh consideration to the Chief Executive Officer, with a condition to deposit 25% of the demand. It was against that order, the petitioner filed the Original Petition before the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode. The Tribunal held that the order passed by the Wakf Board in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under Section 72(7) of the Act is final and hence a further adjudication as if in a second appeal is not contemplated under Section 83(2) and dismissed the petition. The said order is under challenge in this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that notwithstanding the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer or the Wakf Board, in case there is a dispute over a matter relating to the wakf, that is liable to be adjudicated under Section 83 of the Act. It is all the more so, since the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred and the exclusive jurisdiction for such adjudication is that of the Wakf Tribunal. Still further it is contended that any person interested or aggrieved by an order made under the Act or Rules is entitled to approach the Tribunal for the determination of such dispute/matter relating to the wakf. Reliance is placed on the Bench decision of this Court in Pookoya Haji v. Cheriyakoya, 2003 3 KerLT 32. Learned Counsel for the respondent however contends that the order passed by the Wakf Board having attained finality, it is not liable to be the subject matter of a further adjudication before the Tribunal.