SHAHIDA HASAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application has been filed by Dr. (Mrs.) Sahida Hasan who claims to be the Mutwalli of 10 annas share of Hasan Imam Waqf Estate. She has challenged the notification published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (herein after referred to as the L.A. Act) on 19.12.2009 in the newspaper and on 03.01.2010 in the District Gazette Extra ordinary declaring that the land and building known as "Rizwan Palace" is to be acquired by the State Government. This writ application also seeks to challenge the decision of the State Government holding that the acquisition is being made under Section 17 (1) of the L. A. Act is unwarranted as there are no circumstances which justify the use of Section 17 (1) of the L. A. Act.

(2.) THE main ground for challenging the said acquisition is that the petitioner claims that the properties are Waqf properties and could not have been acquired without the prior consent of the Waqf Board and by doing so, the State Government is depriving the petitioner and the other beneficiaries their rights vis -a -vis the properties sought to be acquired. The question as to whether the Waqf Board would have any jurisdiction over a waqf -alal -aulad has been decided in the case of Begum Asma Jafar Iman & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (AIR 1975 Patna 48). A challenge was made by the petitioner to the authority of the Bihar State Shia Waqf Board to interfere in the administration, management and affairs of Hasan Imam Waqf Estate on the ground that it does not come under the provisions of the Waqf Act. While considering this question, this Court has considered several judgments of the Privy Council as well as the Supreme Court and come to the conclusion that only such waqf -alal -aulad in which simultaneously while making provisions for the family members and descendents some property is dedicated for any purpose which is recognized as pious, religious or charitable by Muslim Law will be covered by the definition of waqf. In the present writ -application there are no such pleadings to the effect that the property in question was dedicated for the poor or for any pious purpose recognized under the Muslim Law. As such this Court finds that there is no occasion for the State Government to seek permission of the Wakf Board for been made without determining the shares of the beneficiaries. I must reject this submissidn at the very outset as there is no dispute regarding the share, the only dispute is with regard to demarcation of the share. It is contended that the acquisition is bad on the ground that it does not acquire the entire block of land appertaining to the properties known as "Rizwan Palace" for which there is no justification.

(3.) THE second intervention application being I.A. No. 8667 of 2011 has been filed by Ms. Tehmina Imam Punwani, daughter of Late Syed Akbar Imam. She admittedly has a share in the said property and as such she is necessary party in the writ application. I may add here that Ms. Punwani is not opposing the acquisition, as in its present state, she has not been able to gain or enjoy the benefits which are to accrue to the beneficiaries, due to the litigations with regard to this property.