SYED SHAUKAT IMAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application had originally been filed by three persons who were members of the Bihar Subai Sunni Majlis -e -Awqaf. Opposite party No. 11 Syed Mazhar Imam, however, has since been transposed to the category of petitioner and has been numbered as petitioner No. 4. It may be stated that this Majlis came into existence as a second Majlis under the Bihar Waqfs Act of 1947, being Bihar Act VIII of 1948. Section 8 of the Act contains the provision in regard to the constitution of the Majlis and it provides under Sub -section (1), Clause (a), that out of the members of the Majlis to be constituted, two will be appointed by the State Government. It is stated by the petitioners that the notification dated the 4th March, 1967, issued by the State of Bihar contained the names of opposite party Nos. 10 and 11 (Md. Mazhar Hussain and Syed Mazhar Imam) as members of the Majlis appointed by the Government. It may be stated that the old Sadar also fixed the 2nd of April, 1967, as the day for the meeting of the Majlis for electing a new Sadr. Before, however, the meeting could be held, a second notification was issued on the 21st March, 1967, (annexure C), promulgated and published in the Bihar Gazette, replacing opposite party Nos. 10 and 11 by opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 (Syed Manzar Imam and Md. Yunus). The present application was accordingly filed on the 9th of May, 1967, challenging the validity of the notification, annexure C. It may be stated in passing that on the 18th of May, 1967, a third notification was issued by the Government (annexture E) removing Syed Manzar Imam (opposite party No. 2) and appointing in his place Md. Tahir (opposite party No. 13).

(2.) The grievance made by the petitioners, who are members of the Majlis, is that they have an interest in the Majlis being properly constituted and as such they can challenge the validity of the order of the Government in removing opposite party Nos. 10 and 11 who were duly appointed under Section 8 (1) (a) of the Act. Reference is made in this connection to Section 8 of the Act which provides for the manner in which the Sadr and the other members of the Majlis will be elected or appointed together with their term of office. Section 14 of the Act provides for the removal of the Sadr and members. Section 14 runs as follows: - -

(3.) Prayer is made also that annexure E should be quashed inasmuch as it says that in supersession of the notification dated the 4th of March, 1967, this notification is being issued. This notification has to be quashed automatically because if the appointment of oppotise party Nos. 10 and 11 (No. 11 since transposed to the category of petitioner) is upheld, the appointment of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 cannot stand. Even in regard to the use of the word "supersession", the notification is bad inasmuch as annexure A has been held to be valid and no subsequent notification superseding it can be held to be operative. To avoid any doubt, it may also be mentioned that since the appointment of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3. (Syed Manzar Imam and Md. Yunus) has been held to be invalid, the appointment of Md. Tahir in place of Syed Manzar Imam must also fell to the ground.