[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
M. Moideen Bava vs Kerala State Waqf Board on 17 December, 2025
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
1
WP(C)No.45725 of 2025
2025:KER:97634
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 45725 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 M. MOIDEEN BAVA, AGED 75 YEARS
S/O. ABDURAHIMAN MARAKKARAKAT HOUSE, P.O PONNANI SOUTH
PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679586
2 IBRAHIM MADANI, AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. SIDDIQUE, PARANTE HOUSE, P.O PONNANI SOUTH,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679586
BY ADVS.
SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF
SMT.MOLLY JACOB
SMT.ASHIFA YOUSEFF
SRI.SHOUKATH HUSAIN
SMT.AKHEELA FARZANA
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, V.I.P.
ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI, PIN - 682017
2 SIYARATH JUMA MASJID & MADRASA PARIPALANA COMMITTEE
(REG.NO.7139/RA), P.O, PONNANI SOUTH REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY A.B. UMMER., PIN - 679586
3 P.K KASIM KOYA
PRESIDENT SIYARATH JUMA MASJID & MADRASA PARIPALANA
COMMITTEE (REG.NO.7139/RA), P.O, PONNANI SOUTH, PIN -
679586
4 A.B UMMER KUTTY
2
WP(C)No.45725 of 2025
2025:KER:97634
S/O ABU, ALIYA ALIYAMAKKANATH HOUSE, PONNANI SOUTH,
PIN - 679586
5 MR. NOWFAL.K,
CONVENOR, KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD, THRISSUR DIVISIONAL
OFFICE, PIN - 682017
6 MR. SHAMEER K.M
RETURNING OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD, PIN -
682017
BY ADVS.
SHRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ, SC, WAQF BOARD
SRI.P.A.ABDUL JABBAR
SRI.MUHAMMED SHAFFI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
3
WP(C)No.45725 of 2025
2025:KER:97634
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna, J.
The petitioners, who are the respondents in O.P. No.5 of
2024 before the Kerala State Wakf Board ('Wakf Board' in short),
filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) To call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P6
and to quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and passed in
violation of the principles of natural justice.
(ii) To declare that the process for convening the General
Body Meeting, which was adjourned due to lack of quorum
on 31.10.2025, shall continue from the stage at which it
was adjourned, under the supervision of the Convenor and
Returning Officer already appointed by the Wakf Board.
(iii) To direct 5th and 6th respondent to continue the process
of election by convening the general body of the 2 nd
respondent in view of the unanimous decision by parties".
2. According to the petitioners, they are the Vice
President and Secretary, respectively, of the 2nd respondent,
Siyarath Juma Masjid and Madrasa Paripalana Committee (the
'Committee', in short), which is an ancient 900-year-old Wakf
institution consisting of nearly one thousand families. The
petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P6 interim order dated
05.11.2025, passed by the Wakf Board directing immediate
2025:KER:97634
elections to the 2nd respondent Committee. The petitioners
contend that Ext.P6 order was obtained by the 4th respondent by
suppressing material facts, despite the Committee having
regularly convened meetings under the supervision of the Board-
appointed Convenor and Returning Officer and having already
initiated the process of convening a valid General Body Meeting.
The further case of the petitioners is that the impugned Ext.P6
order imposes an unreasonable financial burden on a financially
weak coastal community and derails an already lawful election
process.
3. On 05.12.2025, when this writ petition came up for
admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent
Wakf Board was directed to get instructions as to whether Ext.P6
order is one issued without notice to the petitioners.
4. On 08.12.2025, when the writ petition was taken up
for consideration, learned Standing Counsel, on instructions,
submitted that Ext.P6 order was passed by the Wakf Board after
advancing O.P. No.5 of 2024. In the memo filed, there is no
endorsement to the effect that notice is given to the learned
counsel for the petitioners herein, who are respondents 1 and 2 in
2025:KER:97634
that original petition. On 08.12.2025, this Court admitted the writ
petition on file. The learned Standing Counsel took notice for the
1st respondent Wakf Board. Urgent notice was issued through
special messenger to respondents 2 to 6. On 08.12.2025, this
Court granted an interim stay of the operation and enforcement of
Ext.P6 interim order dated 05.11.2025 issued by the Wakf Board
pending final disposal of the writ petition, for a period of two
weeks.
5. On 15.12.2025, when this writ petition was taken up
for consideration, respondents 2 to 4 entered appearance through
a counsel, who sought time to get instructions as to whether
Ext.P6 interim order is issued without notice to the petitioners.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent Wakf Board and
the learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 4.
7. During the course of arguments, the learned Standing
Counsel for the Wakf Board as well as the learned counsel for
respondents 2 to 4 fairly conceded that Ext.P6 order was passed
by the Wakf Board without notice to the petitioners. Therefore, we
find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the
2025:KER:97634
petitioners that natural justice is denied to the petitioners since
Ext.P6 order dated 05.11.2025 was passed by the 1st respondent
Wakf Board by advancing the matter without giving notice to
them. In such circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set aside
the said order and direct the Wakf Board to reconsider the matter
afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioners also to put
forward their contentions.
In the result, without expressing anything on the legal and
factual contentions raised by the parties, the writ petition is
disposed of by setting aside Ext.P6 order dated 05.11.2025 passed
by the 1st respondent Wakf Board. The 1st respondent is directed
to consider the said interlocutory application afresh after giving
opportunity to the petitioners as well as the respondents to put
forward their contentions on merits, as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
sks MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE
2025:KER:97634
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 45725 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF O.P. NO. 5/2024
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 26-
11-2024
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING
DATED 08-10-2025
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING
DATED 31-10-2025
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
26.11.2025
