Dismissed

Major Shahanawaz v. the Chief Executive Officer and Ors.

Karnataka HC8 Apr 2024WP/200616/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petitioner claiming third-party interest in Waqf property challenged the Deputy Commissioner's rejection of his revision. The High Court held that such a claimant must approach the Waqf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995, and dismissed the petition with that liberty.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Waqf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

Major Shahanawaz Vs the Chief Executive Officer and Ors. — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2933 WP No. 200616 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA WRIT PETITION NO. 200616 OF 2024 (KLR-CON)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MAJOR SHANAWAZKHAN, S/O SYED SIRAJODDIN AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OCC: SOCIAL SERVICE AND PRESIDENT MAJOR SHAHANAWAZ KHAN HYDERABAD KARNATAKA SANGHA (R), RESIDENCE OF MANVI TQ: MANVI DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. B. K. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, Digitally signed KARNATAKA WAKF BOARD, by RENUKA DARUL AWKAF, Location: High NO. 6 CUNNINGHAM ROAD, Court Of BANGALORE-560052. Karnataka

¶13

THE DISTRICT WAKF OFFICER, NEAR Z. P. OFFICE, BESIDE AMEER TRADING COMPANY, ARAB MOHALLA, RAICHUR-584001.

¶14

SRI SIRAJA, S/O P. KAJAMIYAN AGE: MAJOR OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, RESIDENCE OF MANVI TQ: MANVI DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2933 WP No. 200616 of 2024

¶16

P. MOHAMMED RAFI, S/O P. KAJAMIYAN AGE: MAJOR OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE RESIDENCE OF MANVI

¶17

TQ: MANVI DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAICHUR DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶19

THE TAHASILDAR, MANVI TQ: MANVI DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶20

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAICHUR TQ: RAICHUR DISTRICT: RAICHUR.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. SRI LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;

¶23

SRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R5 TO R7; SRI SYED JAVEED UL HAQ, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 5 IN FILE NO. REV/APPEAL/ALN/E-19095/2022-23 DATED 17.11.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE F, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. II) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO. 3 AND 4 NOT TO RAISE ANY STRUCTURE IN LAND SY NO. 7/1 AND 7/2 MEASURING 4 ACRES 4 GUNTAS EACH SITUATED AT MANAVI TOWN, DIST RAICHUR,

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2933 WP No. 200616 of 2024

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Heard Sri B.K.Hiremath, learned counsel for the

¶29

petitioner, Sri Liyaqat Fareed Ustad, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri Syed Javeed Ul Haq, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4, and Sri Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.5 to 7.

¶30

The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

¶31

“(i)issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order passed by respondent No. 5 in file No.Rev/Appeal/ALN/E19095/2022-23 dated 17.11.2023 vide annexure-F, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶32

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 3 and 4 not to raise any structure in land Sy No.7/1 and 7/2 measuring 4 acres 4 guntas each situated at Manavi town, Dist Raichur.”

¶33

Writ Petitioner claims third party interest in Waqf property belonging to Waqf Board and the property is to be retained in the same manner and not to make any construction.

¶34

He approached the Deputy Commissioner making District Waqf Officer and one Siraj, as parties in Appeal No.Rev/Appeal/ALN/ E-19095/2022-23.

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:2933 WP No. 200616 of 2024

¶36

The Deputy Commissioner, after notifying the parties, rejected the revision filed by the petitioner herein. Against the said Order, petitioner is before this Court.

¶37

Petitioner claims that he is interested in the property of the Waqf. If it is so, he is entitled to approach the Waqf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶38

With such liberty, writ petition stands dismissed.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

kcm CT:SI LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 57

Major Shahanawaz v. the Chief Executive Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Major Shahanawaz v. the Chief Executive Officer 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

Syed Mukhtar Ahmed Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Pratap Vs State of Karnataka and Ors.

Siddappa and Anr. Vs the Deputy Commissioner and Ors.

M/S Kesoram Industries Sltd Vs the Superintendent

Sayed Murtuza Husaini S/O Syed Mahmood Hussaini Vs the Karnataka State and Ors.

Gangamma W/O Sangappa Sakkari Vs Kumari Megha and Ors.