SAIBUDEEN Vs. TAMIL NADU WAKF BOARD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the first respondent in item No. 19/14, Na. Ka. No. 17228/2009/A1/K. Kumari, dated 29.01.2014 and the consequential notification made in Lr. Rc. No. 17228/2009/B1/KK dated 31.07.2014 published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette in No. VI -3(a)/69/2014 dated 06.08.2014 and quash the same. The petitioner is one of the elected Members of the Governing Body of the Uthuman Lebbai Sahib Mosque Trust, Thittuvilai, Kanyakumari District (for short 'the Mosque'). The said Mosque is notified under the Wakf Act 1995 under G.S. No. 95/KK. The properties of the Wakf are administered as per the Scheme framed by the Travancore High Court in A.S. No. 20 of 2011 (55 of 1906) and the Wakf has been administered till date as per the said Scheme and in case of any necessity to alter any of the provisions of the said Scheme, it is done by making an application before the Scheme Court at Nagercoil (1st Additional Subordinate Court at Nagercoil).

(2.) While so, the election to the said Wakf was held on 13.02.2011, in which, the petitioner and other members were elected as the members of the Governing Body which included the third respondent also. Out of the elected members, the third respondent was appointed as the Muthavalli of the Wakf. However, consequent to his election, as Muthavalli of the Wakf, the third respondent started acting against the interests of the Wakf and also started acting arbitrarily preventing the members of the Wakf from effectively administering a Wakf and also practised discriminatory practices in permitting the beneficiaries of the Wakf from worshipping and using the burial ground.

(3.) In the meanwhile, the third respondent is said to have preferred an application to the first respondent board on 15.11.2013 seeking alteration of the Scheme framed in A.S. No. 20/1101 (55 of 1906) framed by the Hon'ble Court of Travancore gravely altering the very fundamentals of administration stipulated in the Scheme. It is relevant to note that the said application was preferred without consulting any other Members of the Governing Body. The fourth respondent, who is personally arrayed as a party in this Writ Petition against whom the petitioner alleged mala fides served as the Chief Executive Officer of the first respondent Board and he is also a Member of the Jamath and is a voter for the election of the governing body too. He is also a close relative of the third respondent. The first respondent Board issued the impugned order by which the existing Schemes in A.S. No. 21 of 1101 (55 of 1906) was fully altered by accepting the Draft Scheme submitted by the third respondent. Before passing the said order accepting the Scheme submitted by the third respondent, no notice was ever issued to the other Members of the Governing Body or the Jamath. Once the Scheme is framed by the Hon'ble High Court of Travancore, all applications thereafter for modification on approval of the elected members are done by the Scheme Court, namely, the First Additional District Court, Nagercoil and the first respondent has no jurisdiction to pass the order impugned in this Writ Petition. However, contrary to the same, the third respondent has filed the application for modification of the Scheme to the first respondent Board, who has also passed the impugned order modifying the Scheme. Further, the impugned order has been passed under Sec. 32 read with Sec. 69 of the Wakf Act, whereas, the said provision empowers the first respondent Board only to settle Schemes if no Scheme has already been framed. It does not empower the Wakf Board to alter or modify a Scheme framed by the competent Court. Ultimately, he prayed for the quashing of the impugned order of the first respondent.