HAJI B PAKKIR MOHAMMED Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ Petitioner-Haji B.Pakkir Mohammed, whois the president of Madrasa-E-Merjul-Uloom @ IslamiaKalvi Sangam at Dharmapuri (hereinafter referred to as'Sangam'), has filed W.P. No. 21750 of 2010, questioningthe Resolution, dated 06.07.2010, of the Chairman ofthe Wakf Board, (communicated to the Petitioner on19.07.2010), whereby, the Application, dated31.05.2005, submitted by the Petitioner-Sangam, withthe claim that the Petitioner/sangam is not a wakf,came to be rejected, based on the earlier order/Schemeframed by the Special Officer of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board bearing R.C. No. 3598/85/B2/Dhar/85, dated22.09.1992, thereby, the Islamia Kalvi sangam wasamalgamated along with (a) Mohamed Ali Memorial Club, (b) Madrasa Mehrajul Uloom, and (c) Masjid-e-Bilal asone Single Wakf, called "Moulana Mohamed Ali MunnetraSangam". Hence, both the proceedings, dated 06.07.2010and 22.02.1992, are sought to be quashed. In W.P. No. 15177 of 2010, the very samePetitioner challenges the proceedings of the WakfBoard, dated 29.04.2010, bearing Na.Ka. No. 3598/85A6/Dharmapuri (S. No. 12, Resolution No. 80/10) and theconsequential proceedings, dated 03.06.2010, of theChief Executive Officer, TN Wakf Board, in and by whichthe Board assumed direct Management of the Sangam aswell as the other three wakfs in terms of what isprovided under Section 65 of the Wakf Act, 1995 , byappointing the Superintendent of Salem Wakf as theAdministrative Officer and calling upon the erstwhileManagements including the Petitioner-Sangam to renderthe accounts, etc. One Mr. D.S.Khalandar, Secretary of the Sangam/Society, has filed CRP (NPD) No. 3713 of 2010,seeking to set aside the judgment and decree, dated23.03.2010, passed by the learned Principal SubordinateJudge, Krishnagiri, in W.O.S. No. 90 of 2006, whereby,the Plaintiff-Sangam's prayer to exclude it from thepurview of wakf and to grant injunction, restrainingthe Wakf Board from interfering with the Management ofthe Sangam, was negatived.

(2.) Since the above two Writ Petitions and theCivil Revision Petition are interconnected and theissues arising therein need a common consideration, thecases are heard together and finally, disposed of bythis Common Order.

(3.) Certain crucial facts necessary to understandthe nature of issues arising in the cases are brieflydetailed below, for better appreciation: Mohammed Ali Memorial Club Wakf, Dharmapuri, aSurveyed and Notified Wakf vide Gazette Sl. No. 41 ofDharmapuri, was initially managed by a Committee headed by one Janab D.S.Naseer Ahamed. The land belonging tothe said Wakf was leased out to the Petitioner-Sangam,a Society registered under the Societies RegistrationAct. On the leased land, the Society constructed shopsand buildings and, there is also an Arabic Collegecalled Madrasa-e-Mehrajul Uloom under the management ofthe Society. It is the case of the Sangam-Society that itwas established with four objects viz., to impartreligious education, found Madrasas, help the needy topursue studies in Medicine and Engineering and to takepart in cultural activities and, in order to achievethose objectives, the Society has been raising fundsthrough subscription from its members, donation fromphilanthropists, rental income from the leaseholdproperties etc. It is the further case of the Sangamthat the Society has a General Body, ExecutiveCommittee and Office Bearers and it is periodicallysubmitting the Returns with the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies. While so, on 16.03.1992, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued a Gazette Notification in G.O. No. 163,stating that the State Government had taken a policydecision to take over the management of the Tamil NaduWakf Board, and consequently, appointed a SpecialOfficer for a period of one year and the said SpecialOfficer went exhaustively examining the acts done bythe previous Managements. In the matter of the Wakf inquestion, the Special Officer, after receivingrepresentations from the Society, conducted a detailedenquiry and, after hearing the parties including theOffice Bearers of the Society, ultimately passed theproceedings, dated 22.09.1992, inRC. No. 3598/B2/Dhar/85, amalgamating Mohammed AliMemorial Club and Masjid-e-Bilal as well as the Madrasarun by the Society viz., Merjaul Uloom, and the IslamiaKalvi Sangam which is also run by the Society, togetheras one Single Wakf called 'Moulana Mohammed AliMunnetra Sangam' and accordingly, framed a Scheme anddirected the said amalgamated Wakf to be registeredwith the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board. In accordance with thesame, the Board constituted a General Body and selected a Committee headed by Janab J.Basheer Ahamed and approved the same. Questioning the Scheme, dated 22.02.1992, a writpetition in W.P. No. 19202 of 1992 was filed by oneS.P.Bava and another, and the said petition wasdismissed by this Court on 11.02.2000 for want ofprosecution. One of the interested persons by name A.MohammadArab also filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 17457 of1992, challenging the Scheme framed by the SpecialOfficer and, this Court, by order dated 23.11.2000,declined to interfere with the scheme, however,permitted the Petitioner to institute a suit before theTribunal and agitate his right in the manner known tolaw as provided under Section 32(3) of the Wakf Act,1995. The Petitioner-Sangam filed a suit in O.S. No. 6of 2005 before the Wakf Board Tribunal (Sub Court),Krishnagiri, seeking to declare the Scheme as null andvoid and the said suit was dismissed for default. TheInterlocutory Application filed to restore the suit was also returned for want of court fee in the Plaint.When such return was challenged before this Court byway of CRP (PD) No. 394 of 2005, by order dated29.08.2006, the plea was negatived holding that theproper remedy open for the Sangam is to re-present theapplication after complying with the defects pointedout in the application. On 31.05.2005, the Petitioner made arepresentation to the Wakf Board, seeking clarificationand to conduct an enquiry under Section 40 and 70 of theWakf Act. As the representation yielded No. outcome, awrit petition was filed in W.P. No. 19959 of 2005,wherein, by order dated 20.06.2005, this Court issued adirection to the Wakf Board to dispose of therepresentation within 12 weeks. On 06.04.2006, based on the Scheme, dated22.09.1992, the Wakf Board passed a Resolution toappoint a 9 Member Committee for the administration ofthe amalgamated wakf for a period of three years.Challenging the same, the Sangam filed W.P. No. 18240 of2006 and, on 17.06.2006, obtained an order of interim injunction in the Miscellaneous petition filed viz., M.P. No. 1 of 2006 in W.P.18240 of 2006. On 15.02.2010,the main Writ Petition came to be dismissed asinfructuous as the tenure of the committee was over byefflux of time. Another suit filed on behalf of the Society byone Sardar in W.O.S. No. 102 of 2005 on the file of thePrincipal Sub Judge, Krishnagiri, questioning theScheme was dismissed on 23.03.2010. By representation, dated 29.04.2010, thePetitioner addressed the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, seekingnecessary action on the earlier representation dated31.05.2005. By proceedings of the Board, dated 06.07.2010,the representation/application, dated 31.05.2005, ofthe Sangam/Society, seeking the Board to treat theSangam and its properties as a separate entity totallydifferent from the amalgamated wakf was considered interms of the orders, dated 20.06.2005, passed in W.P. No. 19959 of 2005, and ultimately rejected, leading tofiling of W.P. No. 21750 of 2010, questioning not only the proceedings dated 06.07.2010 but also the Scheme ofthe year 1992 said to have been framed on consent byall the parties including the Sangam. The proceedingsof the Chief Executive Officer of the Board dated03.06.2010 with the annexure proceedings, dated29.04.2010, informing appointment of an AdministrativeOfficer and seeking rendition of accounts from theSangam before the said Officer, are challenged in W.P. No. 15177 of 2000. The Society also filed W.O.S. No. 90 of 2006before the Principal Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri,against the amalgamation and such suit having beendismissed on 23.03.2010, challenging the same, CRP(NPD) No. 3713 of 2010 came to be filed by the Secretaryof the Society.