Disposed

Melarkode Muslim Jumath Committee v. Kerala State Waqf Board

Kerala HC3 Nov 2020WP(C)/22713/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought quashing of a Waqf Board order and directions for police protection to implement other Waqf Board orders regarding a masjid. The Court held that given the status quo order by the Waqf Tribunal, it was inappropriate to order police protection. The petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; petition disposed of leaving liberty to move the Waqf Tribunal.

Melarkode Muslim Jumath Committee Vs Kerala… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶7

WP(C).No.22713 OF 2020(L)

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

MELARKODE MUSLIM JUMATH COMMITTEE CHEENKKODE STREET, MALARKODE P O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT NAZAR, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 48 YEARS, KATTITHERUVU, MELARCODE P.O , PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.BABY MATHEW

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VIP ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM- 682017,

¶13

2 DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, HASHIMI TOWER, MASJID ROAD, KOKKALA, TRISSUR - 682001.

¶14

3 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, PALAKKAD-678001

¶15

4 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALATHUR-678524.

¶16

W.P.(C).22713/2020

¶17

¶18

5 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALATHUR POLICE STATION- 678524.

¶19

6 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALATHUR POLICE STATION - 678524.

¶20

7 SUDHEER M AGED 30 YEARS S/O. MANARAS, PANIKULAM HOUSE, CHEENIKODE, MELARKODE P.O, PALAKKAD - 678703.

¶21

8 ABDUL KHADER AGED 74 YEARS S/O.SULAIMAN RAWTHER, CHERIYAMEKKATTIL, CHERAMANGALAM, PALAKKAD - 678703.

¶22

SHRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY, SC, WAQF BOARD SR.G.P-SMT.K.R.DEEPA

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

W.P.(C).22713/2020

JUDGMENT

Ravikumar, J.

This writ petition is filed seeking quashment of Ext.P9 and for a direction to implement Exts.P7 and P8 orders and in that matter, to order police protection. Melarkode Muslim Jumath Committee is the petitioner. However, the pleadings in the writ petition are taken as if the President of the Melarkode Muslim Jamath Committee is the petitioner. In fact, as stated hereinbefore, the Melarkode Muslim Jamath Committee is the petitioner in the writ petition. According to the petitioner, it is the plaintiff in W.O.S. No.33 pending on the files of the Waqf Tribunal, Ernakulam. The suit is thus instituted by the petitioner herein for decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the management of the Muhiyudeen Juma Masjid by the committee. According to the petitioner, Exts.P7 and P8 are to be implemented. Ext.P9 order would reveal that the Waqf Board is reluctant to implement Exts.P7 and P8

¶29

W.P.(C).22713/2020 4

¶30

orders in view of the order of status quo passed by the Waqf Tribunal as is evident from Ext.P5. Taking into account the rival submissions and pleadings in the writ petition, we are of the view that, pending the original suit, it will be inappropriate for this Court to order for police protection for implementing Exts.P7 and P8 orders for the simple reason that whether they would violate the order of status quo is a matter to be considered. Evidently, that matter has to be considered by the Waqf Tribunal. The original suit is of the year 2018 and the order of status quo viz., Ext.P5 was passed as early as on 26.3.2019. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the parties have to approach the Waqf Tribunal for an early disposal of the original suit. Pending the original suit, especially, in view of the order of status quo issued by the Tribunal, we are afraid, any further order might pave way for violation of the said order. Taking into account all these circumstances, we are of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of leaving liberty to the petitioner to move the Waqf Tribunal

¶31

W.P.(C).22713/2020

¶32

¶33

for an early disposal of the original suit. If an early disposal is not possible for any reason, it is for the parties to move the Tribunal for appropriate orders to vacate the order of status quo and for appropriate interim orders. With the said observation, this writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

C.T.RAVIKUMAR

JUDGE

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE

W.P.(C).22713/2020

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 01.09.2018 IN IA NO.307 AND IA NO.326/2018.

¶45

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 06.02.2019,IN CRP(WAQF) NOS 696/18 AND 697/18. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.03.2019 IN WP(C) NO.6141/2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16.03.2019 IN IA NO.514/2019 IN WOS NO.281/2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2019 IN IA NO.514/2019 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 30.09.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶46

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.10.2020 OF THE DIVISIONAL WAQF OFFICER, ADDRESSED TO THE 7TH AND 8TH RESPONDENTS.

¶47

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.10.2020 OF THE DIVISIONAL WAQF OFFICER ADDRESSED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶48

W.P.(C).22713/2020

¶49

¶50

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13.10.2020 OF THE DIVISIONAL WAQF OFFICER. spc/

Melarkode Muslim Jumath Committee v. Kerala State Waqf Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Melarkode Muslim Jumath Committee v. Kerala State Waqf Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savithri Vs State of Kerala

Shyni M.J. Vs Binoy Joseph

Suo Motu Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

D.Gopinath, Vs the State of Kerala

Abaan Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.Suryadeep International Fzc

Ayyankali Social Workers Labour Contract Co-Operative Society Ltd. No. T.2151 Vs Travancore Devaswom Board