Disposed

Syed Ali .S v. The Chief Executive Officer

Madras HC23 Aug 2024WP(MD)/20213/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought Writ of Mandamus to recover Waqf property and initiate action under Waqf Act provisions. Court directed First Respondent to consider the representation on merits with a notice-back within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider the representation dated 22.12.2023 and pass orders within eight weeks after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Syed Ali .S Vs The Chief Executive Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 23.08.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

S.Syed Ali

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, No.1, Jaffer Syrang Street, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai – 600 001.

¶11

2.Ashurkhana @ Pathunonbuchavadi Waqf, Represented by its Muthawalli, Vadagarai, Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶12

3.K.Abbas Ali

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 22.12.2023 and thereby recover the Ashurkhana @ Pathunonbuchavadi Waqf property in T.S.No.620 measuring an extent of 2930 Sq.Ft situated at Keelavadagarai Village, Periyakulam Taluk and Theni District under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and initiate action against third respondent under Section 52A of the Waqf Act, 1995 within a stipulated time.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/5

¶17

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶18

For Petitioner : M/s.A.Ajimath Begum For R-1 : Mr.K.Jeyamohan Standing Counsel

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present Writ Petition is filed for Mandamus seeking direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.12.2023 and thereby recover the Ashurkhana @ Pathunonbuchavadi Waqf property in T.S.No.620 measuring an extent of 2930 Sq.ft situated at Keelavadagarai Village, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District under Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and initiate action against the third respondent under Section 52A of the Waqf Act, 1995.

¶21

It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the second respondent Waqf is surveyed and notified as G.S.No.310/Theni on 27.05.1959. While so, the father of the third respondent, has occupied the Waqf property by fraudulently mutating revenue records and constructed houses and other buildings in the said property. After his death, there is gross mismanagement of the Waqf property by the third respondent and his siblings. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 22.12.2023 to the first respondent seeking action against the third

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5

¶23

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶24

respondent and to recover the Waqf property. Since the said representation was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶25

It was submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent that the petitioner's representation would be considered and orders would be passed in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks, which was accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶26

In view of the same and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for in this Writ Petition, there shall be a direction to the first respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.12.2023 , on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested persons/stake holders, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the representation and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the representation on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶28

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶29

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There

¶30

shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

23.08.2024

¶32

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5

¶34

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶35

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

¶36

¶37

W.P.(MD).No.20213 of 2024

¶38

23.08.2024

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5

Syed Ali .S v. The Chief Executive Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Ali .S 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

Muthupandi. a Vs The Joint Commissioner

M/s.v.Sanguine Exim Vs The State Tax Officer

F.Kaleel Rahman Vs The Chief Executive Officer

Tvl a J Traders Vs The State Tax Officer (Roving Squard 3)

Swamy Govinda Ramanuja Dasa @ Govindarajan Vs The Commissioner of Hr and Ce

Tvl. A.J. Traders Vs The State Tax Officer (Roving Squard-3)