Disposed

Uzma Suppliers v. Karnataka State Board

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2022WP/101519/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a notice to vacate waqf premises. Court noted alternative remedy under the Waqf Act. Writ disposed of while directing respondents to issue a fresh compliant notice and consider petitioner's representation, granting a four-week stay on eviction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; respondents directed to reconsider notice, issue fresh notice per Rule 23, consider lease extension representation, and not take action for four weeks.

Uzma Suppliers Vs Karnataka State Board — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 101519 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 101519 OF 2022 (GM-WAKF)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

UZMA SUPPLIERS OPP: INDIAN BANK, T B SANITORIUM ROAD, CHOWL BAZAR BALLARI DIST BALLARI-583102 REPREPSENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MOHAMED RAFIQ ANASARI S/O IBRAHIM ANSARI AGE 48 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O BEEF BUTCHER STREET, NEAR HATTI MAKHAN, WARD NO. 2, COWL BAZAR, BALLARI DIST BALLARI-583102 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH YADAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAKESH M BILKI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

VINAYAKAB V Digitally signedby VINAYAKA BVLocation:DharwadDate: 2022.06.1510:03:40 +0530

¶12

KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF AUQAFS BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DARUL WAKF NO.6 CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052

¶13

THE BALLARI DISTRICT MUSLIM SHAADI MAHAL A WAQF REGISTERED WITH THE KARNATAKA

¶14

¶15

WP No. 101519 of 2022

¶16

STATE BOARD OF AUQAF BENGALURU NALLACHERUVU BALLARI DIST BALLARI-583101 REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. D.L. LADKHAN, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITIUTON OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION DATED 07.04.2022 IN LTR.NO.EEE/C AND M/BLY/21-22/01 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶23

The petitioner who contends that he is a tenant under respondent No.2-Waqf Institution is before this Court seeking to challenge the impugned notice dated 07.04.2022 at Annexure-G, by which the petitioner is required to vacate the premises within a period of 7 days.

¶24

¶25

WP No. 101519 of 2022

¶26

Learned Counsel for the respondents however submits that this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be maintained since there is

¶27

an alternative efficacious remedy available for the petitioner as contained under Section 83(2) of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶28

However, learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶29

submits that respondent No.2 has issued the impugned notice in violation of the requirement of the Rules, more particularly, Clause (iv) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 of the Waqf Properties Lease Rules, 2014. Learned Counsel submits that the said provisions requires the owner/lessor to give three notices one after another with a gap of one month. Learned counsel would further submit that respondent No.2 has also not considered the representation given by the petitioner for extension of lease period.

¶30

Nevertheless, since an alternative efficacious

¶31

remedy is available for the petitioner, this Court is not

¶32

¶33

WP No. 101519 of 2022

¶34

inclined to admit the petition. At this juncture, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the authority in terms of the provisions contained in the Waqf Act, 1995, but, in the meanwhile, the petitioner should be protected at least as contemplated under Clause (iv) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 23.

¶35

Accepting the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition stands disposed of while permitting the petitioner to file an application/appeal as provided under Section 83(2) of the Waqf Act, 1995. At the same time, the respondents are also hereby directed to reconsider the impugned notice and issuance of fresh notice in terms of Clause (iv) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 of the Rules, 2014, as stated hereinabove.

¶36

Respondents may also consider the representation dated 23.08.2021 given by the petitioner seeking extension of lease period.

¶37

Respondent No.2 shall not take any action against the petitioner for a period of four weeks before which the

¶38

¶39

WP No. 101519 of 2022

¶40

petitioner may approach the authorities as stated

¶41

hereinabove.

¶42

Ordered accordingly.

¶43

Pending, I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

¶44

SD JUDGE

¶45

Uzma Suppliers v. Karnataka State Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uzma Suppliers v. Karnataka State Board

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

Smt. Vimalakka Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Padmashree W/O. Mahaveer Huded Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Ganji Bhimappa S/O Ganji Hanumanthappa Vs State of Karnataka

Ratnavva B Cholachagudda Vs Ministry of Home Affairs

Shivakumar S/O Bhimanna Rakkasagi, Vs the Border Security Force

Smt. Mallavva Alias Mallavva W/O Siddappa Patil Vs Rudrappa S/O Mallappa Tirakappanavar