Remanded

Anjuman Mahbubia Committee v. Kamroonisha and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC18 Oct 2013WPC/1311/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in an Article 227 writ petition directed the Collector to decide the petitioner's pending representation regarding encroached Waqf property. The Court declined to express an opinion on the merits, leaving it to the Collector to determine the issue strictly in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Collector to decide the pending representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law considering all facts and circumstances.

Anjuman Mahbubia Committee Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

Msy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH

¶5

WRIT PETITON (C) No_ {3H /2013 giimggmM WMTT

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

@U
$w wt“
RESPONDENTS 1.
2.

¶8

Anjuman Mahbubia Committee, ViHage Patna, Through^— Mutwalli, Mohamad Sam Khan S/o Shaikh HusbuHa, Aged about 48 years, Anjuman Mahbubia Committee, Patna, P.S. & Tahsii Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G‘.)

¶9

Kamroonisha D/o Late Zareeb Khan aged about 4S years,

¶10

Khairoonnisha W/o Mohd. Iqbal, aged about 35 years,

¶11

Samusunnisha D/o Late Mohd. Zareeb Khan, aged about 30 years,

¶12

Ali above R/o Village Patna, P.S. &Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G.)

¶13

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Collector, District Korea (C.G.)

¶14

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

¶15

¶16

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶17

SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER

¶18

W.P.(C) NO. 1311 of 2013

¶19

PETITIONER Anjuman Mahbubia Committee

¶20

Versus

¶21

RESPONDENTS Kamroonisha and Others

¶22

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIC OF INDIA

¶23

Smt. Renu Kochar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Dy. A.G and Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan,’P.L for the State‘

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(18.10.2013)

¶26

According. to the petitioner^certainWaqf property is being encroached by respondents 1 to 3 for which the petitioner has already made representation before the Collector (Annexure^P—5) but till date the said representation has not been decided by the Collector.

¶27

Counsel for the petitioner submits that purpose^offilingthis petition^{wouldbeserved} if direction is issued to the Collector for deciding the pending representation. State counsel submits that from the pleadings an’i documents it is not clear that the’property in dispute belongs to Waqf Board and if Waqf Board has any objection then it should have approached the Court. Be that as it may as the limited prayer of the petitioner^is'for deciding the pending representation (Annexure^P—5), it is expected from the Collector to decide the pending representation of the petitioner^{inaccordancewithlawafterconsideringallthefactsand'} circumstances of th’e case. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and it would be for the Coliector to look into the matter and decide^{therepresentationofthe} petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

¶28

Sd/Pritinker^Diwaker Judge

Anjuman Mahbubia Committee v. Kamroonisha and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjuman Mahbubia Committee v. Kamroonisha 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

Khoob Chand Parakh and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Shamima Bano Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

C.G. Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

Remilal Rajwar Vs the State of C.G.and Ors.

Ramayan Prasad Sahu And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

G.s.dey Vs Smt. Anjana Shrivastava and Ors.