Delhi High Court
Sh. Mohd. Mehfooz vs Delhi Waqf Board. And Anr. on 26 February, 2018
$~57
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment pronounced on: 26.02.2018
+ W.P.(C) 1833/2018 & CM No.7592/2018
SH. MOHD. MEHFOOZ ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anis Ahmed, Adv.
versus
DELHI WAQF BOARD. AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, Standing
Counsel with Mr. D. Kapoor, Adv.
for R-1
Mr. Siddharth Dutta and Mr.
Dushyant Singh, Advs. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner via this writ petition has challenged the order
dated 29.1.2018, passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sub-
Division, Kotwali, New Delhi. By virtue of the impugned order,
the petitioner has been directed to vacate the premises described as
property bearing No.3136, Gali Naqqanchian, First and Second
Floor, Turkman Gate, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter referred to as
'subject property').
1.1 It is not disputed before me by counsel for the petitioner that
the subject property is a Waqf property and that the subject
property will be covered by the Waqf Act, 1995 (in short 'Act')
and the Waqf Properties Lease Rules, 2014 (in short '2014 Rules').
2. Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, who appears on advance notice, says
that the petitioner cannot continue in the subject property and no
private negotiations can be held with him by the Board in view of
the provisions made in Statute and Rules. Reference in this behalf
is made to Section 56 of the Act and Rules 5 to 7 of the 2014
Rules.
3. In brief, the third proviso to Section 56 of the Act provides
that the Board before making out a lease qua any Waqf property
will publish the details of the lease in at least one leading National
and Regional newspaper.
4. Likewise, Rules 5 to 7 of the 2014 Rules provide for inviting
bids where the Board wishes to lease out its property. Quite
clearly, therefore, no private negotiations can be held with the
petitioner. It is quite obvious, a position which is not disputed by
the counsel for the respondents is that the petitioner can also bid
for obtaining leasehold rights in the subject property once a Public
Notice is taken out for that purpose.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the
petitioner to participate in the auction, once the same is advertised
by respondent no.1.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner says that the
petitioner will vacate the property if some leeway is given for the
said purpose.
7. Furthermore, counsel for the petitioner says that he will pay
market rent for extended period which can be calculated on the
basis of 5% of the circle rate which is prevalent for the area in
which the subject property is situate.
7.1 Furthermore, counsel for the petitioner says that an
undertaking will be filed in these terms within ten days from today.
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is given three months time to
vacate the subject property, which will commence from today. The
petitioner will vacate the subject property on or before 26.5.2018.
Qua this period, the petitioner will pay the market rent, in advance,
that is on or before seventh day of each calendar month, which will
be equivalent to 5% of the value of the subject property calculated
at the circle rate prevailing in the area where it is located. In case,
there is any failure to pay the rent, the protection granted by this
Court will dissolve automatically.
9. The petitioner will file an undertaking to this effect within
ten days from today.
10. The respondent will, then, be at liberty to have the subject
property vacated, albeit, in accordance with law.
11. The petition is, as indicated above, disposed of in the
aforementioned terms.
RAJIV SHAKDHER
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 26, 2018
rb
