Disposed

Aynul Yakheen v. the Chief Executive Officer

Madras HC16 Feb 2022WP(MD)/3054/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking injunction against a private anniversary function at a Madurai Wakf building. The court directed Wakf Board officials to consider representations and decide on the request.

What did the court decide?

Directed 1st respondent to consider petitioner's and 3rd respondent's representations and take a decision on whether the function can be held.

Aynul Yakheen Vs the Chief Executive Officer — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.3054 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.02.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD) No.3054 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD) No.2669 of 2022

¶4

A.Aynul Yakheen ... Petitioner

¶5

/vs./

¶6

1.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Chennai.

¶7

2.The Superintendent of Wakf/ Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Having office at No.1, Town Hall Road, Madurai.

¶8

3.S.G.Azam Ali

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to prevent the conduct of any private function either in the name of anniversary function of Kazi Tajudeen or the distribution of their amount among the members of the 3^rd Respondent family within the premises of Kazimar Periya Pallivasal, Kazimar Street, Madurai in consideration of the Petitioner's representation dated 09/02/2022.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan Standing Counsel For R3 : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff for M/S.Ajmal Associates

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2.

¶14

2.Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff, learned counsel, who takes notice for the 3^rd respondent, submits that the function, namely Kazi Tajudeen, is to be held tomorrow (17.02.2022) as the Pallivasal is under the purview of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Act, 1995.

¶15

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

¶16

1/2

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.3054 of 2022

¶18

3.After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent, this Court is inclined to pass the following directions:-

¶19

i) The 1^st respondent, namely, the Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Chennai, is directed to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 08.02.2022 and 09.02.2022 and take a decision as to whether the function can be held at the request of the 3^rd respondent or whether the request of the petitioner is to be accepted.

¶20

ii) The 1^st respondent is also directed to pass appropriate orders on such representations on the basis of the records that are available at the end of today itself and communicate the decision of the same to both the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent herein.

¶21

4.The writ petition stands disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

16/02/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

¶26

¶27

1.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Chennai.

¶28

2.The Superintendent of Wakf/ Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Having office at No.1, Town Hall Road, Madurai.

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.3054 of 2022 16.02.2022

¶30

ma(CO) TR(16.02.2022) 2P 3C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

Aynul Yakheen v. the Chief Executive Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aynul Yakheen v. the Chief Executive Officer

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

Prithivirajan.M.P Vs the Commissioner of Transport

M/s.Rudveda Syndicates Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Velmurugan D.S Vs the District Collector (Cum)

B.Moorthi, Vs The Union of India

Ravichandran .K Vs the District Collector Cum Regional Transport Authority

Madurai Sidha Vaidhya Sangam Vs the Additional Secretary