Muhammed Nissam vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10577 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 33248 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          MUHAMMED NISSAM
          AGED 27 YEARS
          S/O.KUNJIKKAMMU, ANNACHAMPALLY HOUSE, EDARIKKODU P.O,
          THIROORANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
          PIN - 676501
          BY ADV ANJANA KANNATH


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO MINORITY WELFARE
          DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
    2     KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD
          VIP ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
          EXECUTIVE, PIN - 682017
    3     EDARIKKODE MAHLLU JUMA MASJID
          PUTHAN PURAYKKAL, PANTHAKKAL ROAD, EDARIKODE,
          THIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 676501
          SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ
          SMT.NAZREEN BHANU
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 33248 OF 2023              2

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner makes an uncommon request, that the 3 rd

respondent - which is his own 'Mahal' - be directed to issue a

certificate to him, to the effect that he is residing within their confines

and that he is not married before.

2. Smt.Anjana Kannath - learned counsel for the petitioner

explains that the petitioner is engaged to be married to a lady, but that

her 'Mahal' now insists that he produce the afore certificate for

contracting the marriage.

3. Sri.Jamsheed Hafiz - learned Standing Counsel for the 2 nd

respondent - Waqf Board, submitted that his client has no comment to

make in this issue because, normally, a groom is not required to get a

certificate as afore mentioned; but that perhaps, he has been asked to

do so by the bride-to-be's Mahal, on account of certain specific

circumstances.

4. Smt.Nazreen Bhanu - learned Standing Counsel appearing for

the 3rd respondent, submitted that her client is also confused because

no one else has approached her client before seeking a certificate as

afore mentioned. She submitted that, therefore, if the petitioner is to

make an appropriate representation before her client, they will issue a

certificate as is legally permissible, after examining all the relevant

documents in their possession.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition; and leave

liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent with an

appropriate application for the certificate that he requires, and if this

is done within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment, said Authority will hear him and then issue an

appropriate certificate as permissible in law, subject to all

requirements being satisfied, without any delay but not later than one

week thereafter.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/16.10

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33248/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CLERANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHAL OF THE PETITIONER'S FIANCé DATED NIL Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WORK VISA OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE EMPLOYER DATED 16.8.2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05-10-2023