A. MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA Vs. A. ABDUL MAJID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board to appoint an interim Muthavalli in the light of the order passed by this Court dated 08.03.2010 in C.R.P.(PD) (MD)No.304 of 2009 .

(2.) ACCORDING to the appellant, the writ petition filed at the instance of the third party who was not a party to the Civil Revision Petition and who has not made any representation by himself, is not maintainable. According to him, instead of the writ petitioner one Janab T. Basha Bai and other Muslim Jamathars submitted a mahazar before the second respondent Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board to appoint an interim Muthavalli, whereas the writ petitioner has not given any representation and the writ petition filed at his instance is not maintainable.

(3.) IT is made very clear that the appellant was a party to the Civil Revision Petition. The Civil Revision Petition arose against the order passed in the Wakf Appeal No.3 of 2008 filed under Section 83 of Wakf Act, 1995, r/w. Order VII, Rule 1 and r/w. Order I, Rule 8 of C.P.C. by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy. Originally, the Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, by order dated 25.07.2008 directed the Superintendent of Wakf who is the third revision petitioner to conduct secret election for the post of Muthavalli of Pulivalam Mohideen Andavar Pallivasal and Dharga. Against that order, the appellant filed an appeal under the Wakf Act, 1995, in Wakf Appeal No.3 of 2008 on the file of the Wakf Tribunal viz., the Principal Subordinate Court, Trichy and the same was allowed on 26.11.2008. Against the order passed in Wakf Appeal No.3 of 2008, the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.304 of 2009 was filed by the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board by its Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Wakf Board and the Superintendent of the Wakf against order passed in Wakf Appeal No.3 of 2008. In the Civil Revision Petition, the appellant is the respondent. The Wakf Board has taken a fixed stand that there are many complaints against the appellant who was acting as the Muthavalli. In the Civil Revision Petition, it was pointed out by the learned Single Judge that the Wakf Board is having unlimited power of settling schemes and also appointing an interim Muthavalli as per Sections 32 and 63 of the said Act. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition was disposed of by stating that the Wakf Board has got power to act as per the provisions under Sections 32 and 63 of the Wakf Act 1995. Further, the Wakf Board was directed to invoke the provisions under Section 32 and 63 of the Act so as to settle the dispute in question. This order was passed on 08.03.2010 against which, the appellant has not filed any appeal and the order has become final. Thereafter, on 21.04.2010 the writ petitioner along with one T.Basha Bai and Muslim Jamathars have made a representation to the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf Board to implement the order passed in C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.304 of 2009 and invoke the scheme and appoint an interim Muthavalli. The said representation was signed by many of the Jamathars. Again, the writ petitioner has made another representation on 28.10.2010. Earlier, the writ petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.9028 of 2010 to appoint an interim Muthavalli as per the order passed in C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.304 of 2009. This Hon'ble Court directed the respondents to consider the representation dated 21.04.2010 and pass orders in accordance with law.