Disposed

Safiulla Wakf Estate and Anr. v. the West Bengal Board of Auqaf and Anr.

Calcutta HC12 May 2022WPO/2162/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged demands under Section 72 of the Wakf Act, 1995, claiming violation of natural justice due to lack of prior hearing and assessment order. The Court held the writ petition was not maintainable as an effective alternative remedy existed under Section 72(7), reserving liberty for the petitioner to approach the Board.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of; liberty reserved to approach the Wakf Board under Section 72(7) within 30 days.

Safiulla Wakf Estate and Anr. Vs the West Bengal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

OD 5

¶2

WPO 2162 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶3

SAFIULLA WAKF ESTATE AND ANR. VERSUS

¶4

THE WEST BENGAL BOARD OF AUQAF AND ANR.

¶5

BEFORE:

¶6

The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA Date : 12^th May, 2022.

¶7

APPEARANCE: Mr. Ranajit Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Mitra, Adv. … for the petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Sk. Md. Galib, Adv. Mr. Abu Siddiqui Mallik, Adv. Mr. P. Sinha, Adv. …for the respondent nos. 1,2.

¶9

Mr. S. S. Arefin, Adv. … for the Wakf Board.

¶10

The Court:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the demands dated 7^th February, 2020, 7^th October, 2020 and 10^th August, 2021, raised by the Wakf Board under Section 72 of the Wakf Act of 1995.

¶11

It is submitted by Counsel for the petitioner that the above letters of demand have been raised without providing for any assessment order, or complying with the principles of natural justice by providing a hearing.

¶12

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition would therefore be maintainable, notwithstanding alternative remedy before the Board under the provision of Section 72(7), since there is violation of principles of natural justice.

¶13

This Court is of the view, that the petitioner has an effective and efficacious alternative remedy provided under the statute before the Wakf Board

¶14

¶15

itself. The violation of the principles of natural justice are not so grave as to deprive any basic rights to the writ petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner is the current Mutawali, in respect of the said property.

¶16

In that view of the matter, WPO/2162/2022 is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Wakf Board under the provisions of Section 72(7) of the said Act of 1995. If the petitioner approaches the Board within a period of 30 days from date, the Board shall proceed to consider the petitioner’s stand or appeal, in accordance with law, and the Rules applicable therefor.

¶17

(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)

¶18

S.Chandra/mg

Safiulla Wakf Estate and Anr. v. the West Bengal Board of Auqaf and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safiulla Wakf Estate and Anr. v. the West Bengal Board of Auqaf and Anr.

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

Sayed Nurul Hoda Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Sk Sajahan and Another Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sasanka Sekhar Jana Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Sanjay Adhikari Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Asish Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sadhan Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.