Disposed¶50

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Bombay HC18 Nov 2025WP/13675/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Waqf Act 1995; Section 40(3) Waqf Act - opportunity of hearing before inquiry/decision by Waqf Board; Section 83 Waqf Act - remedy before Waqf Tribunal; withdrawal of writ petitions with liberty to approach Tribunal; Maharashtra Waqf Board resolution dated 26.02.2025 and consequential order/communication dated 28.03.2025; Mohd. Basitali Mohd. Sajidali v. State of Maharashtra; Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad; W.P. Nos. 13655, 13661, 13662, 13667, 13675, 13704, 13715 of 2025; disposed of as withdrawn on 18 November 2025; advocates G. R. Syed (petitioner), S. S. Joshi, S. B. Narwade, S. B. Pulkundwar, R. S. Wani (AGP for State).

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petitions permitted, with liberty to approach the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act. ¶50

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:BHC-AUG:31897-DB

¶2

917, 921, 922, 927 934, 950, 957.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

917 WRIT PETITION NO.13655 OF 2025

¶5

Mohd. Basitali Mohd. Sajidali

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶8

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶9

… 921 WRIT PETITION NO.13661 OF 2025

¶10

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali VERSUS

¶11

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶12

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Narwade, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶13

… 922 WRIT PETITION NO.13662 OF 2025

¶14

Mohd Basitali Mohd. Sajidali

¶15

VERSUS

¶16

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶17

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶18

… 927 WRIT PETITION NO.13667 OF 2025

¶19

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali

¶20

VERSUS

¶21

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶22

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Narwade, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶23

934 WRIT PETITION NO.13675 OF 2025

¶24

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali

¶25

VERSUS

¶26

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶27

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. R. S. Wani, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶28

[1]

¶29

917, 921, 922, 927 934, 950, 957.odt

¶30

… 950 WRIT PETITION NO.13704 OF 2025

¶31

Mohd. Basitali Mohd. Sajidali

¶32

VERSUS

¶33

The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

¶34

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶35

… 957 WRIT PETITION NO.13715 OF 2025

¶36

Mohd. Basitali Mohd. Sajidali VERSUS

¶37

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

¶38

Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

¶39

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

¶40

HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

¶41

DATE : 18 NOVEMBER 2025

¶42

ORDER :

¶43

. Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners in each case.

¶44

The petitioners are challenging the resolution dated 26.02.2025 and consequential order/communication dated 28.03.2025 passed by respondent No.2. According to the petitioners, without giving any opportunity of hearing, the Waqf Board has taken the decision. According to the petitioners, the said decision is in respect of Waqf property and as per Section 40(3) of the Waqf Act, 1995 i.e. earlier Act, an opportunity of hearing ought to have been given to the petitioners when an inquiry is

¶45

[2]

¶46

917, 921, 922, 927 934, 950, 957.odt

¶47

alleged to have been conducted by the Board.

¶48

The learned AGP in the respective matters, after waiving notice for respondent No.1/State in each matter, points out that as per Section 83 of the Waqf Act, the petitioners should approach the Tribunal.

¶49

In view of the said situation, the learned Advocate for the petitioners in all the petitions, upon instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the petitions, with liberty to approach the Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act.

¶50

Leave granted. The writ petitions stand disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.

¶51

[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE

¶52

scm

¶53

[3]

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Basitali Mohd Sajidali v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savita Panditrao Biradar Alias Savita Vasant Alpe vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Baliram Onkar Chavhan and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Motilal Trambak Chavan and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Trhough the Secretary and Others

Annapurna Vishwambhar Hajgude vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Jagdevi Namdev Udte vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Varsha Mahesh Solanke and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others