Karantaka State Board of Wakfs v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Mar 2026WA/1479/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka State Board of Wakfs; Wakf Act 1995 Section 52(2); Special Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban Sub-Division; order passed against deceased person; Sri Abdul Azeez Khan expired 18.09.2014; W.P. No. 36083/2015 (GM-WAKF); WA No. 1479 of 2025; fresh proceedings against legal representatives; Section 4 Karnataka High Court Act; delay condonation I.A No.1/2025; writ appeal disposed.

What did the court decide?

Delay in filing the appeal condoned (I.A No.1/2025 allowed); the learned Single Judge's order dated 10.02.2025 upheld, with a clarification that the Special Deputy Commissioner may initiate fresh proceedings against the legal representatives in accordance with law; pending interlocutory application disposed of. ¶¶47

Karantaka State Board of Wakfs Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in setting aside the Special Deputy Commissioner's order dated 20.06.2015 on the sole ground that the person against whom it was directed (Sri Abdul Azeez Khan) had already expired on 18.09.2014. +1 more

¶¶45

Court's answer

The Division Bench found no infirmity in the learned Single Judge's order setting aside the Special Deputy Commissioner's order dated 20.06.2015, which had been passed against Sri Abdul Azeez Khan after his expiry.

¶¶46

Ratio / Principle

Since the Special Deputy Commissioner's order was set aside only because it was directed against a person who had expired, the setting aside will not preclude the Special Deputy Commissioner from initiating fresh proceedings against the legal representatives, in accordance with law.

¶¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (GM-WAKF) — Karnataka State Board of Wakfs v. State of Karnataka & Ors.: A Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka (Vibhu Bakhru, CJ and C.M. Poonacha, J) disposed of the Board's appeal, filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, against the learned Single Judge's order dated 10.02.2025 in W.P. No. 36083/2015 (GM-WAKF). The Single Judge had set aside the order dated 20.06.2015 of the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru under Section 52(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995 — which directed that possession of the subject property, not handed over by Sri Abdul Azeez Khan, be taken over — on the sole ground that Khan had expired on 18.09.2014, almost more than nine months before the order was passed. Affirming the Single Judge, the Bench found no infirmity in the order, but clarified that, the order having been set aside only because it was directed against a person who had expired, this would not preclude the Special Deputy Commissioner from initiating fresh proceedings against the legal representatives, in accordance with law. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:16622-DB WA No. 1479 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶8

WRIT APPEAL NO. 1479 OF 2025 (GM-WAKF)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

KARANTAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS REP. BY ITS CHIEF ECECUTIVE OFFICER No.6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE - 560 009

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY MS. SABAHATH SULTANA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001

¶16

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN BANGALORE - 560 001

¶17

SRI. ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN SINCE DEAD BY LRS

¶18

3(a) ARJUMAN D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:16622-DB WA No. 1479 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

3(b) SAJEEDA D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

¶23

3(c) SULTAN AHMED KHAN D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT ARAKERE VILLAGE HULIMAVU POST ANEKAL TALUK

¶24

BANGALORE DISTRICT- 560 076

¶25

3(d) ASGARI BEGUM D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

¶26

3(e) ANSARI BEGUM D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶27

3(f) AKTHARI BEGUM D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

¶28

3(g) ARIFA KHATOON D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶29

3(h) AMJAD KHAN D/O LATE ABDUL AZEEZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS

¶30

RESPONDENT NOS. 3(a) (b) AND (d) TO (h) ARE RESIDING AT NO.950 GANIGARA BEEDI NEAR BAZAAR STREET VENU HOTEL, SARJAPURA TOWN ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE - 560 035

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., AGA FOR R-1 & 2 SMT. DIVYA K., ADVOCATE FOR SRI KRISHNA NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-3(h))

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:16622-DB WA No. 1479 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE BY ORDER DATED 10.02.2025 IN W.P. No. 36083/2015.

¶37

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU ,CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶39

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶40

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU,CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶41

For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application – I.A No.1/2025, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶42

The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 10.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.36083/2015 (GM-WAKF). The petitioners had filed the said petition impugning an order dated 20.06.2015 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru under Section 52(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995, inter alia, directing that possession of the subject property be taken over as the same has not been handed over by Sri Abdul Azeez Khan.

¶43

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:16622-DB WA No. 1479 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

The learned Single Judge allowed the said petition and set aside the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner on the sole ground that Sri Abdul Azeez Khan had expired on 18.09.2014 which is almost more than nine months prior to the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner.

¶46

We find no infirmity with the said order. However, we clarify that since the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner was set aside only on the ground that it is against a person who has expired, this order will not preclude the Special Deputy Commissioner from initiating fresh proceedings against the legal representatives, albeit in accordance with law.

¶47

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

¶48

The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed

¶49

of.

¶50

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶51

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶52

AHB, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10

Karantaka State Board of Wakfs v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karantaka State Board of Wakfs v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. G. K. Suresh Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Tulasi Hospitality Services Vs Sri.Naganna Ashok Kumar

M/S N R Builders Stone Crusher Vs the State of Karnataka

Umapathi S Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Katwa Udyog Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Finepunch Fab Private Limited Vs Dr.Mahesh, IAS