Allowed

Subhania Anjuman Islamia Bilaspur v. the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC9 Oct 2013WP/1322/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner in a writ petition to approach the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for a decision on an eviction order passed by the Wakf Board, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to approach Sub-Divisional Magistrate for expeditious decision on eviction order application.

Subhania Anjuman Islamia Bilaspur Vs the State of… — Landlord and Tenant | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

Cfl^s-^

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR ICHHATTISGARHI

¶4

W.P.No.l'3^'2/2003

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

^SUBHANIAANJUMAN ISLAMIA, BILASPUR

¶7

Through: HAJIMD. ISMAIL RAZVI, VICE-PRESIDENT, R/o Infront ofAjeet Hotel, Telipara, Biiaspur.

¶8

ti,

¶9

¶10

RESPOND&NTS :1) STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
// Through: Addl.Chief Secretary,
„»
/ . ^9'^ Deptt. of Home, DK Bhavan,
7<s^'w Raipur (CG)"
/ ^^S>':^.-^ 2) SUB-D1VISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
/<*. ^ <Jwlc%~>^"^
Bilaspur Sub-Division,
.^^y^v Bilaspur (CG).
^'
3) SHEIKH KALLU,
S/o Shejkh Shubrati,
Aged 68 years,
Retd. Post & Tetegraph Messenger
R/o Gondpara (Quereshi Bada),
Tahsil & Dist. Bilaspur (CG).
4) NIYAZAtl,
S/o Late Miyabaksh,
Aged 54 years, Tailor Master,
Prop. Naaz Tailors,
R/o Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur.
Tah§if&Dist. Bila6pur (CG).
PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22)5/227 OB?THE CONSTITUTION OF
SNDIA /

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶15

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker

¶16

W.P.No.1322/2003

¶17

PETITIONER

¶18

SubhaniaAnjuman Islamia Bilaspur

¶19

VERSUS

¶20

RESPONDENTS

¶21

State of Chhattisgarh and others

¶22

Shri Ashish Shrivastava counsel for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao Dy. AG for respondents No.land 2. Shri Devendra Pratap Singh counsel for respondents No. 3 and 4.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(09.10.2013)

¶25

According to the petitioner, private respondents are its tenants and the property belongs to Wakf situate at Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur. 2. On 17.7.2001 Chief Executive^{OfficeroftheerstwhileM.P.} Wakf Board, Bhopal has passed an order for eviction of private respondents but still the said order has not been complied with by them nor the State^{Authoritiesin} particular^{theSubDivisional} Magistrate (respondent No.2) is helping the petitioner in executing the said order.

¶26

Case of respondents No. 1 and 2 is that the petitioner has not approached the Sub Divisionat Magistrate and therefore question of helping it does not arise.

¶27

Adopting the stand of the State Government it has been argued by the counsel for the private respondents that the order

¶28

¶29

"'^ ^I^ ,'~;.'-^. A' ,F.'..-..'^^£^ \ ':^....'_^.-.^^--

¶30

of eviction of private respondents has been passed without ahy lawful authority.

¶31

Counsel for the petitioner submits that purpose of filing this petition would be served if the petitioner is permitted to approach respondent No.2 and respondent No.2 is directed to decide the application of the petitioner so that the order of Wakf Board can be executed.

¶32

State counsel submits that it is not only the petitioner who can approach respondent No.2 but the Chief Executive Officer can also approach it and oniy then the order of Wakf Board can be executed.

¶33

Be that as it may, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach respondent No.2. In the event of filing any application by the petitioner before respondent No.2, it may decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law considering the facts and circumstances ofthe case.

¶34

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and respondent No.2 would be at liberty to decide the application filed by the petitioner in — accordance with law. _ —

¶35

Sd/Pritinker Diwakar Judge

¶36

ff^

Subhania Anjuman Islamia Bilaspur v. the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhania Anjuman Islamia Bilaspur v. the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

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

Sammukh Prasad Pandey Vs Bhagwati Prasad

Mariam Education Welfare Society Vs National Council of Teacher Edu.and Ors.

Manohar Singh And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Subhania Anjuman Islamiya Bilaspur Vs the State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Mohd.Zakir Sheikh Vs Surjit Kaur and Others