Disposed

Farzan Ali v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2022WRIC/23205/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to entertain a writ petition filed by a petitioner claiming interest in graveyard land as a devout Muslim. The court held that without the Waqf Board as a party or proof that the land is recorded as waqf property, the petition could not be entertained, though the petitioner was allowed liberty to approach the Waqf Board.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to represent its cause to the Waqf Board concerned.

Farzan Ali Vs State of U P and 2… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 29

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23205 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Farzan Ali Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ikram Ahmad,Asar Mukhtar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶5

Pursuant to the order dated 23.08.2022, an amendment application has been filed by which prayer is made that instead of "Members", it should be read as "Number" in prayer I.

¶6

The amendment application is allowed.

¶7

Let necessary amendment be carried out during the course of the day.

¶8

Heard Sri Ikram Ahmad for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

¶9

The case of the petitioner is that certain plots are entered in the revenue records as graveyard. Some more plots were acquired in the name of graveyard but their entry as graveyard has not yet been made in the revenue records. It is alleged that as they have not yet been entered as graveyard there is apprehension of encroachment therefore, the petitioner has prayed that newly acquired plots be also entered in the records as graveyard. The petitioner has stated that he has made a representation in that regard to the District Magistrate, Budaun.

¶10

We put a specific query to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to in what capacity the petitioner has filed this writ petition and as to whether the petitioner is a Mutwalli of the Waqf or is recorded as Manager of the graveyard.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he is neither a Mutwalli nor is recorded manager of the waqf but being a devout muslim, he has interest in the graveyard.

¶12

Be that as it may, neither the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board or Shia Waqf Board is a party in these proceedings nor it is demonstrated that the land has been surveyed as a waqf property or entered in the waqf register. In such circumstances, in absence of material particulars of the waqf and the properties entered in its name, we decline to entertain this petition by leaving it open to the petitioner to represent its cause to the Waqf Board concerned, if there is any property of the waqf lying unprotected.

¶13

With the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed off.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.11.2022. Rks.

¶15

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.02 11:32:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Farzan Ali v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farzan Ali v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Virendra Maddhesiya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rahul Barnwal Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

M/S Jay Maa Hp Gas Gramin Vitrak and Another Vs Union Of India and 3 Others

Vishnu Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Avanish Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sunil Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another