Disposed¶49

Sri. Kousar Ali Shaik v. the Karnataka State Waqf Board

Karnataka HC14 Jan 2026WP/47782/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; M.G.S. Kamal J; WP No. 47782 of 2018 (GM-WAKF), decided 14.01.2026; Waqf Act, 1995 — Sections 69(1), 69(3) proviso, 69(4), 83, 32(1) proviso, 17(3), 27, 46, 47, 50, 63, 64, 72; scheme of administration of Juma Masjid Sunni, Islampet, Davanagere; Karnataka State Waqf Board; alternative remedy — appeal to Waqf Tribunal; writ of certiorari; petition disposed of with liberty; condonation of delay; contentions kept open.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief on merits; petition disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to avail the remedy available under law (appeal before the Tribunal under proviso to Section 69(3) and relief under Section 83, Waqf Act, 1995); time consumed in pursuing the petition may be considered for condonation of delay; all contentions kept open. ¶49

Sri. Kousar Ali Shaik Vs the Karnataka State Waqf… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's writ challenge to the Karnataka State Waqf Board's approval of the scheme of administration (Annexures-B and C) should be entertained by the High Court when proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 69 of the Waqf Act, 1995 provides an appeal before the Tribunal against orders passed under Section 69.

¶45

Court's answer

Against the order passed by the Wakf Board under Section 69(1) of the Waqf Act, 1995 according approval of the scheme of administration, the remedy of the aggrieved parties is an appeal before the Tribunal under the proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 69 of the Waqf Act, 1995, and the petitioner may additionally seek such other relief as may be permissible under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶45

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition was disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available under law, with the time consumed in pursuing the petition liable to be considered for condonation of delay if an application is made, and all contentions kept open.

¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-WAKF) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India — challenge to the Scheme of Administration of Islampet Jumma Masjid Sunni (Wakf), Davanagere approved by the Karnataka State Waqf Board by order dated 16.01.2014 under Section 69(1) of the Waqf Act, 1995 (Annexure-C), together with the Scheme (Annexure-B) and order dated 27.12.2016 (Annexure-D) — counsel for petitioner not pressing relief as regards Annexure-D — Court noted that proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 69 of the Waqf Act, 1995 provides for filing of an appeal by aggrieved parties before the Tribunal against orders passed under that Section, and that further relief may be permissible under Section 83 — petition disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available under law; time consumed in pursuing the petition may be considered for condonation of delay; all contentions kept open.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:2265 WP No. 47782 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 47782 OF 2018 (GM-WAKF)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. KOUSAR ALI SHAIK AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O MAHBOOB SAB, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS AT NO.587, OPPOSITE JUMMA MASJID, ISLAMPET, DAVANAGERE-577 001.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MAHAMOOD PATEL.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE KARNATAKA STATE WAQF BOARD NO.6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052

¶13

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶14

THE PRESIDENT

¶15

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

ISLAMPET JUMMA MASJID SUNNI, (WAKF) ISLAMPET,

¶17

DAVANAGERE-577 001.

¶18

THE WAQF OFFICER DISTRICT WAQF ADVISORY COMMITTEE, DAVANAGERE-577 001.

¶19

THE MANAGING COMMITTEE ISLAMPET JUMMA MASJID SUNNI (WAKF) ISLAMPET, DAVANAGERE-577 001

¶20

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. D BASAVARAJA.,ADVOCATE FRO R1; R2, R3 - ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED

¶23

V/O DATED 15.04.2021 NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶24

¶25

NC: 2026:KHC:2265 WP No. 47782 of 2018

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SCHEME AT ANNEXURE-B THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.01.2014 AT ANNEXUREC, THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27.12.2016 AT ANNEXURE-D ALL ISSUED BY TEH R-1 - BOARD AND/OR ISSUE DIRECTION/S TO THE RESPONDENTS IN TEH FORM OF A WRIT.

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

¶31

[a]. Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned Scheme at Annexure-B, the impugned order No.KBW/CMC/01/DVG/2013-14 dated 16/01/2014 at AnnexureC, the impugned order No.KSBA/CMC/12/DVG/2016-17 dated 27/12/2016 at Annexure-D all issued by the 1st RespondentBoard in the interest of justice and equity and/or issue any other order/s, direction/s to the Respondents in the form of a Writ, under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

¶32

[b]. Award cost of the Writ Petition.

¶33

[c]. Grant any other or further relief/s to the Petitioner, as this Hon'ble High Court may deems fit and thinks proper under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is

¶35

not pressing the relief with regard to Annexure-D. However, he insists relief with regard to Annexures-B and C.

¶36

The representation given by the petitioner is a request

¶37

to the respondent-Waqf Board to cancel the scheme of administration in respect of Juma Masjid Sunni, Islampet,

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:2265 WP No. 47782 of 2018

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

Davanagere, which is approved by the respondent-Waqf Board

¶42

by its order dated 16.01.2014.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such a relief is permissible in the light of sub-section (4) of Section 69. He submits sub-section (4) of Section 69 provides the Board may at any time, by an order, whether made before or after the scheme has come into force, cancel or modify the scheme. He submits that such a relief is being sought in the light of proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 32 and Sections 46, 47, 50, 63, 64, 72, 27 and Sub-section (3) of Section 17 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶44

The petitioner essentially seeking to set-aside the order passed by the Wakf Board under Section 69(1) of the Waqf Act, 1995 and amendment Act, 2013, according approval of scheme of administration. Proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 69 of the Waqf Act, 1995 provides for filing of an appeal by the aggrieved parties before the Tribunal against the order passed under said Section. In addition, petitioner may also seek such other relief as may be permissible under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶45

¶46

NC: 2026:KHC:2265 WP No. 47782 of 2018

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48