9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Wakfs under Section 4(3) of the Wakf Act, 1954. 2. Finality and conclusiveness of the list of wakfs under Section 6(4) of the Wakf Act, 1954. 3. Applicability of Section 27 and Section 36B of the Wakf Act, 1954. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Wakfs under Section 4(3) of the Wakf Act, 1954: The Supreme Court examined whether the Commissioner of Wakfs has the jurisdiction to enquire whether a certain property is wakf property when such a dispute is raised by a stranger to the wakf. The Court held that the Commissioner of Wakfs, while making a survey of existing wakfs under Section 4(1), is required to submit a report to the State Government under Section 4(3). This report includes particulars such as the number of wakfs, nature and objects of each wakf, and other relevant details. The Court noted that the Commissioner is vested with powers akin to those of a civil court under Section 4(4), suggesting that the enquiry is quasi-judicial in nature. The Court concluded that the Commissioner has the implicit power to enquire whether a property is wakf property, as this is a necessary concomitant of the power to survey. 2. Finality and conclusiveness of the list of wakfs under Section 6(4) of the Wakf Act, 1954: The Supreme Court addressed whether the failure of a person to institute a suit within the time allowed by Section 6(1) makes the inclusion of the disputed property in the list of wakfs final and conclusive under Section 6(4). The Court held that the list of wakfs published under Section 5(2) is not final and conclusive against a stranger to the wakf who is not a mutawalli or a person interested in the wakf as defined in Section 3(h). The Court emphasized that the word "therein" in Section 6(1) refers to the wakf and not the wakf property, thereby confining the dispute to the Board, the mutawalli, and persons interested in the wakf. Consequently, a non-Muslim stranger in possession of the property is not bound by the one-year limitation period and can challenge the list even after its publication. 3. Applicability of Section 27 and Section 36B of the Wakf Act, 1954: The Supreme Court reviewed the High Court's observations regarding Sections 27 and 36B. The High Court had opined that the Board of Wakfs does not have the power to decide whether a property is wakf property if the challenge comes from a stranger who is not a mutawalli or a person interested in the wakf. The High Court also held that Section 36B cannot be used to dispossess a stranger from the property merely because it is included in the list of wakfs. The Supreme Court found these observations to be unnecessary and stated that the High Court should have left the question open. The Court refrained from expressing any opinion on the scope of Sections 27 and 36B, as the issue did not arise directly in the case. Conclusion: The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that the inclusion of the disputed property in the list of wakfs is not binding on the respondents, who are non-Muslim strangers to the wakf. However, the Court set aside the High Court's direction restraining the Board from entering the property in the register of wakfs and from dispossessing the respondents, as it was based on assumptions regarding Sections 27 and 36B, which were not directly in issue. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, allowing the parties to seek remedies according to law.
|
