Disposed

Shakeel Ahamad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023WRIC/36085/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to decide an application for renewal of Mutawalli appointment. The court observed that the petitioner should move a fresh application under Section 63 of the Waqf Act, to be decided expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner directed to move fresh application under Section 63 of Waqf Act, 1995.

Shakeel Ahamad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36085 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Shakeel Ahamad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Atul Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Punit Kumar Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Uttara Bahuguna, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel and Shri Punit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

¶6

In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to respondent no.3.

¶7

Present writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondents to take decision in respect of renewal of Shahi Maszid, Khalilganj, Waqf No.12, Dabrai, Daunkeli, Distt. Firozabad and decide the application dated 27.7.2022.

¶8

The petitioner claims to be Mutawalli and his term has expired on 3.9.2022. He submits that as his work and conduct as Mutawalli has always been satisfactory, he has moved an application for renewal of his appointment as Mutawalli and the same may be directed to be decided expeditiously.

¶9

Shri Punit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for respondent no.2, on the other hand, has raised objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that there is no provision for deciding the application moved by the petitioner. For redressal of his grievance, the petitioner can move an application in terms of the provisions of Section 63 of the Waqf Act, 1995. In case any such application is moved, the same would be processed and decided along with applications of other aspirants within stipulated period.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent, the writ petition stands disposed of with observation that in case the petitioner moves fresh application in terms of Section 63 of the Waqf Act before respondent no.2 within one week, we hope and trust that the same will be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law expeditiously but certainly after giving opportunity to all the stake holders in the matter.

¶11

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 SP/

¶12

Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakeel Ahamad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakeel Ahamad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Jagdamba Rice Mill and Another Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Shiv Sevak Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Deepali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raju Rajan Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramdhan Das Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S. Om Traders Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others