WAQF MADARSA AND YATEEM KHANA NO. 959 THROUGH MOHD. IKHTISAS UDDIN AJMALI SON OF MAULANA MOHD. AJMAL AND MOHD. IKHTISAS UDDIN S/O MAULANA MOHD. AJMAL Vs. CONTROLLER, U.P. SUNNI CENTRAL BOARD OF WAQF,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two properties in dispute in this writ petition bearing municipal numbers 185/174 and 151/155, are claimed by the petitioner Wqaf to belong to it. According to the petitioner the said properties were registered as Waqf properties by U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs under U.P. Muslim Waqf Act, 1960 in the year 1986. True copy of the relevant extract of the Register maintained under Section 30 of the U.P. Act has been annexed as Annexure '7' to the writ petition. According to the said Annexure petitioner Waqf is registered with the Waqf Board and the number of registration is 919. According to the Annexure '7' the two properties in dispute belong to petitioner Waqf, which are situate in Mohalla Nakhas (Property No. 185/174) and Mohalla Mahmood Khan Sarai (Property No. 151/155). According to the said Annexure the said properties have been shown to belong to the petitioner Waqf on the basis of entries in municipal records. Thereafter petitioner intimated the Waqf Board that Kallu and Anil Kumar Rastogi were the unauthorized occupants of parts of the properties in dispute, hence eviction proceedings must be initiated against them (Kallu and Anil Kumar Rastogi have not been impleaded in this writ petition). The aforesaid two persons were issued notice by the Waqf Board. Anil Kumar filed objections before the Waqf Board to the effect that properties in dispute did not belong to petitioner Waqf bearing No. 959 and it, in fact, belonged to another Waqf of the same city which was registered as Waqf No. 21 E List and Mustafa Ali was the Mutwalli of the said Waqf. It was also stated that he was paying rent to Mustafa Ali.

(2.) THEREAFTER proceedings under Section 57 -A of UP. Muslim Waqf Act, 1960 were initiated and completed by the Waqf Board. Waqf Board through its Controller by order dated 4.5.1990 held that the properties in dispute belonged to Waqf No. 21 -Extension List and not to the petitioner Waqf. The said order has been challenged through this writ petition.

(3.) ANNEXURE 18 to the writ petition is extract of Register maintained by the Waqf Board under Section 30 of UP. Act containing the details of properties of Waqf No. 21 -Extension list. At serial No. 1 and 2 in the said Annexure agricultural land is mentioned At serial No. 3 & 4 houses are mentioned which are situate in Mohalla Mian Sarai. Boundaries of the said houses have also been given. In the impugned order the Controller held that the properties in dispute were already registered as properties belonging to Waqf No. 21 -Extension list, hence it could not be registered as properties of the petitioner Waqf. Controller further held that Anil Kumar Rastogi was paying rent to Mutwalli of Waqf No. 21 - Extension list and was not unauthorized occupant. In the said order it has also been mentioned that none of the parties appeared hence matter was decided exparte.