Gujarat High Court
Vahedatali Askarali Bukhari vs Gujarat State Waqf Board on 20 June, 2022
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
C/CRA/52/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 52 of 2022
==========================================================
VAHEDATALI ASKARALI BUKHARI
Versus
GUJARAT STATE WAQF BOARD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MTM HAKIM WITH MR RIZVAN SHAIKH(7146) for the Applicant(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5
MR MANISH S SHAH(5859) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MS MAMTA R VYAS(994) for the Opponent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 20/06/2022
ORAL ORDER
Mr. M.T.M. Hakim, learned advocate appearing on behalf of
the applicants submits that the respondent No.2, who is a
trustee, has since expired, he makes an oral request to delete the
respondent No.2 from the array of the parties. Oral application is
granted. Name of respondent No.2 is ordered to be deleted from
the array of the parties.
2. The present application raises an issue with respect to the
authority and jurisdiction of the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal
determining the proceedings and respective cases by a coram of
less-than three members as per provisions of Section 83 Sub-
section 4 of the Gujarat Waqf Act (hereinafter referred to as the
'Act').
3. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.Manish S.
Shah waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent
C/CRA/52/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2022
No.1.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that the
impugned order is passed by the Chairman and only one
member of the Tribunal and therefore, the same is in the teeth of
the provisions of Section 83 Sub-section 4 of the Act. Therefore,
it is required to be interfered with under the revisional
jurisdiction of this Court.
4.1 It is further submitted that Section 84(3) of the Act
provides that every Tribunal shall consists of the Chairman and
two members and the Tribunal shall deem to be duly constituted
by all the three members.
4.2 It is further submitted that unless and until the case is
determined by a duly constituted Tribunal i.e. by all the three
members. Its decision would be "Coram non-judis" and can be
termed as an order without jurisdiction.
4.3 It is therefore submitted that the judgment and the
impugned order in the present Civil Revision Application is non-
est and passed by the Tribunal not duly constituted under the
Act for the determination of the issues before it.
4.4 Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order is
required to be quashed and set aside and the matter is required
to be remanded back to the learned Tribunal for decision afresh
by duly constituted Tribunal in terms of Section 83(4) of the Act.
5. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent
C/CRA/52/2022 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2022
has not disputed the said contentions and submitted that at the
relevant point of time, the Tribunal was not duly constituted as
there were only two members. But thereafter, by Notification
dated 27.12.2021 all the three members have been appointed
and now the Tribunal stands duly constituted under the Act.
5.1 It was therefore submitted that the impugned order can be
set aside and can be remanded back to the duly constituted
Tribunal to be decided afresh.
6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and considering the fact that now the learned
Tribunal stands duly constituted, the present case is remanded
to the learned Waqf Tribunal for a decision afresh by the duly
constituted Tribunal.
7. The parties be issued fresh Notice in Waqf Appeal No.52 of
2019 and the Learned Tribunal is directed to decide the case as
expeditiously as possible and preferable within a period of 9
months from the date of receipt of this order. Civil Revision
Application accordingly stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
