Disposed

S.Ayubkhan v. the Chairman

Madras HC14 Sept 2021WA/2129/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ appeal regarding a cancelled Wakf lease. It held that seeking mandamus to forebear proceedings without first challenging the cancellation was not maintainable. The court directed the appellant to approach the Wakf Tribunal within four weeks to challenge the notice.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to approach Wakf Tribunal within four weeks to challenge the notice; writ appeal disposed of.

S.Ayubkhan Vs the Chairman — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 14.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶7

W.A.NO.2129 OF 2021
AND
C.M.P. NOS.13453 AND 13454 OF 2021

¶8

S.Ayubkhan

¶9

.. Appellant

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Wakf Board No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street Vallal Seethakathi Nagar Chennai - 600 001

¶12

2. The Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu Wakf Board No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street Vallal Seethakathi Nagar Chennai - 600 001

¶13

3. The Superintendent of Wakfs Tamil Nadu Wakf Board No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street Vallal Seethakathi Nagar Chennai - 600 001

¶14

4. Nawab.Fazilathunnisa Begum Sahib's Mosque
 And Endowments
 Represented by its Muthavalli
 No.419, Anna Salai
 Nandanam, Chennai - 600 035.

¶15

.. Respondents

¶16

Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent
against the order dated 27.07.2021 made in W.P.No.13704 of 2021.

¶17

Prayer in W.P.No.13704 of 2021: Petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of
Mandamus forbearing the Respondents from in any manner
proceeding or acting in furtherance to the Notice dated

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

07.06.2021 issued by the 2nd Respondent vide Na.Ka.No.
13499/06/AA6/Chennai, in pursuance to the resolution passed by
the 1st Respondent in Item No.8 of 2021, vide Na.Ka.No.
13499/2006/Aa6/Chennai, dated 18.02.2021 and thereby further
preventing the petitioner herein, his men, agents or any other
subordinates from their ingress and egress to the petition
property or in any manner disturbing the peaceful possession and
enjoyment of the petition property except by following the
principles of natural justice and the due procedure as envisaged
under sections 54 and 56 of the Wakf Act and Rule 24 (2) of the
Wakf properties (Amended) Lease Rules, 2020.

¶20

For Appellant : Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen
For Respondents : Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed for R4
R1 to R3 : Served - No Appearance

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.

¶23

The lessee of the fourth respondent Wakf has preferred
the above appeal against the order dated 27.07.2021 made in
W.P.No.13704 of 2021.

¶24

2. The short facts leading to filing of the writ appeal
are that the father of the appellant one A.Sattar Khan, obtained
lease of the Wakf land belonging to the fourth respondent for 25
years from 19.07.1971 to 18.07.1996, by virtue of a registered
Lease Deed. The lessee had also put up a superstructure. After
the demise of appellant's father, in a family arrangement, the
leasehold rights of the Wakf property was given to the
appellant. The Wakf was managed as per the Scheme Decree in O.S.
No.63 of 1940. After getting the leasehold rights in a family
arrangement, the appellant applied for extension of lease for 50
years, which was also granted by the fourth respondent herein
from 01.01.1997 to 31.12.2046 by a registered Lease Deed dated
18.11.1999.

¶25

3. While so, after the amendment in the Wakf Act, the
lease period of any Wakf property, should not exceed more than
30 years. As per the amended Act, the lease granted in favour of
the appellant, would expire automatically on 31.12.2026. Hence,
a notice dated 19.06.2021 was pasted on the wakf property
stating that, as per the resolution, the lease in favour of the
appellant has been cancelled. According to the appellant, the
said act of the respondents is illegal and is violative of
Section 54 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and Rule 24(2) of Wakf
Properties (Amended) Lease Rules, 2020.

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

4. Aggrieved by the above notice, the petitioner had
filed a writ petition, the prayer of which is as follows:

¶28

" Petition filed under Article 226 of the

¶29

Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from in any manner proceeding or acting in furtherance to the notice dated 07.06.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Na. Ka. No.13499/06/AA6/Chennai, in pursuance to the resolution passed by the 1st respondent in item No.8 of 2021, vide Na. Ka. No.13499/2006/Aa6/Chennai dated 18.02.2021 and thereby further preventing the petitioner herein, his men, agents or any other subordinates from their ingress or egress to the petition property or in any manner disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petition property except by following the principles of natural justice and the due procedure as envisaged under Sections 54 and 56 of the Wakf Act and Rule 24(2) of the Wakf Properties (Amended) Lease Rules, 2020."

¶30

5. The writ court, has passed an order holding that the
appellant has not challenged the cancellation of 50 years lease
and that any dispute or grievance, an alternate remedy is
available before the Wakf Tribunal. As the terms and conditions
of the lease or even the declaration of the lease, as null and
void, are all question of facts, cannot be gone into under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ petition was
dismissed.

¶31

6. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the appellant has
preferred the above appeal.

¶32

7. The prayer in the writ petition was one for a mandamus
forbearing the respondent from in any manner proceeding or
acting in furtherance to the notice dated 07.06.2021. The Chief
Executive Officer of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, in Proceedings
Na.Ka. No.13449/06/B6 Chennai dated 07.06.2021 has stated that
the lease in favour of the appellant is void and therefore, the
same is cancelled and called upon the appellant to surrender
possession of the property in his possession.

¶33

8. The above said proceedings was based on the resolution
of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board dated 18.02.2021. It is argued by
the learned counsel for the appellant that the above said Notice
was not served on him and it was only pasted on the premises.
But the copy of the proceedings dated 07.06.2021 has been marked
to the writ petitioner through the Wakf Inspector.

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

9. Be that as it may, once the appellant/writ petitioner

¶36

had knowledge about such resolution and the eviction notice, without challenging the same, he has moved this court simply seeking a mandmaus to forebear the respondents from proceeding in furtherance to the above proceedings, which itself is not maintainable. Once the lease is cancelled and if the same is not challenged, the appellant is not entitled for the relief, he is seeking for. Besides, the remedy that is available to the appellant is only before the Wakf Tribunal as the fact of the original lease and the subsequent extension, which were based on the Scheme Decree, are all to be gone into only by the Tribunal.

¶37

10. In the above circumstances, considering the fact that
the appellant has been in possession of the property from 1971
from the days of his father, it would be appropriate to give him
an opportunity to go before the Wakf Tribunal and challenge the
said notice within a period of four weeks from today. Upon such
challenge is being made, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of
the same, within a period of four weeks after affording him an
opportunity of personal hearing and allowing them to mark the
relevant documents before the Tribunal, in accordance with law.

¶38

11. With the above direction, the writ appeal is disposed
of. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, the
connected civil miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)

¶41

// True Copy //

¶42

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶43

Asr

¶44

To

¶45

1. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Wakf Board No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street Vallal Seethakathi Nagar Chennai - 600 001.

¶46

2. The Chief Executive Officer Tamil Nadu Wakf Board No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street Vallal Seethakathi Nagar Chennai - 600 001.

¶47

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶48

3. The Superintendent of Wakfs
 Tamil Nadu Wakf Board
 No.1, Jaffar Syrang Street
 Vallal Seethakathi Nagar
 Chennai - 600 001.

¶49

+1cc to Mr.C.Shankar, Advocate, S.R.No.46302

¶50

+1cc to Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen, Advocate, S.R.No.46293

¶51

+1cc to Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed, Advocate, S.R.No.46737

¶52

W.A.No.2129 of 2021 and
C.M.P. Nos.13453 and 13454 of 2021

¶53

LN(CO)
RLP(06/10/2021)

¶54

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Ayubkhan v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ayubkhan v. the Chairman

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

M.C.Ravikumar Vs v.Sivapadham

S.Kalaiselvi Vs the Inspector General of Registration

K.Ponnammal, Vs the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition Officer)

Villivakkam Velu Vs Anitha

Pavai Varam Educational Trust Vs the Principal Secretary

S.Padma Vs the Tamilnadu Electricity Board