CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. MD REAZUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned judgment dated 26th June, 2018 passed by the learned Chairman, Waqf Tribunal, West Bengal, in eviction case No. 01 of 2017 under Section 54(3) of the Waqf Act of 1995, setting aside the order of the Chief Executive Officer holding the opposite parties to be the encroachers and soliciting approval from the Tribunal for grant of an order of eviction for removing the alleged encroachment and delivery of possession of land encroached upon to the Mutawalli of the Waqf property is subject of challenge in this revisional application.

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner assailing the impugned judgment passed by the Chairman, Waqf Tribunal submitted that learned Chairman, Waqf Tribunal failed to appreciate the relevant provisions of law, mentioned in Section 3 (aa) of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, exempting public Waqf from the application of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1977, and as such determination of the tenancy was not the guiding factor so as to implement the order of the C.E.O. holding the opposite parties to be encroachers. Adverting to a copy of the eviction notice, dated 17th November, 2009, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that after the demise of erstwhile tenant, being the mother of the opposite parties, the tenancy had been duly determined by serving notice, which the opposite parties duly received the same, and this aspect could not be taken care of by the learned Chairman of the Waqf Tribuanl, while setting aside the order of the C.E.O. holding the opposite parties to be the encroachers. Learned advocate for the petitioners further submitted that when there had been sufficient compliance with regard to the formalities, specifically mentioned in Section 54 of Waqf Act of 1995, prior to holding the opposite parties to be the encroachers as per assessment of C.E.O. Board of Waqf, West Bengal, regarding two rooms in occupation of the opposite parties in the first floor having an area of 250 sq. ft. (approx) and one room in occupation, bath with common passage in the mezzanine floor, having an area of 450 sq. ft. (approx), the Tribunal ought to have approved the order of the C.E.O. by granting the order of eviction for removing such encroachment, and delivery of possession of the land in occupation of the opposite parties being encroached upon, to the Mutawalli of the Waqf property.

(3.) Learned advocate for the opposite parties controverting the submission raised by the petitioner submitted that they were in possession of the tenanted premises after the demise of their mother and for the refusal of the Mutawalli to accept the rent, they had been depositing the rent with the Rent Controller, and they did not do anything in respect of the tenanted premises within the meaning of alleged encroachment. Learned advocate for the opposite parties further submitted that the little modification of the tenanted premises under their possession, carried out simply to make it more suitably habitable, done with the verbal approval of previous Mutawalli, long before, could not be construed to be a case of encroachment, as alleged.