Kerala High Court
Solomon vs The Sub Collector on 21 February, 2025
W.P.(C).No.1787 of 2022 1
2025:KER:15583
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 1787 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SOLOMON,
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, MULLURAN HOUSE, NEAR BEMBALASERY
TEMPLE, EDAVANAKKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682502.
BY ADV P.JINISH PAUL
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE SUB COLLECTOR,
FORT KOCHI-682001.
2 THE TAHSILDAR (L&R),
KOCHI TALUK-682001.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
EDAVANAKKAD VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK-682502.
4 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, VIP ROAD, KALOOR ROAD,
KOCHI-682017.
5 IRSHADUL MUSLIMEEN SABHA REP BY ITS PRESIDENT DR.
ABDULLA V.M.
IRSHADUL MUSLIMEEN SABHA, PAZHANGAD, EDAVANAKKAD
VILLAGE, EDAVANAKKAD P.O, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM
-682502, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT DR. ABDULLA
V.M., AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED V.A., VALIYARA
HOUSE, EDAVANKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN -
682 502. ( ADDL R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 19.02.2024 IN IA 1/2023)
BY ADVS.
W.P.(C).No.1787 of 2022 2
2025:KER:15583
JAMSHEED HAFIZ
P.A.ABDUL JABBAR
OTHER PRESENT:
SC- JAMSHEED HAFIZ,GP- NIMA JACOB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 21.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.1787 of 2022 3
2025:KER:15583
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
--------------------
W.P.(C).No.1787 of 2022
--------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of February, 2025
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed challenging
Ext.P2 proceedings of the Tahsildar Land Records
whereby steps were taken to evict the petitioner.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is a
coolie worker and he is residing in a rental house
under the control of the additional 5th respondent
based on Ext.P1 lease agreement executed on
15.01.2014. During 2016, an attempt was made by
some of the committee members of the additional 5th
respondent to trespass into the house of the
petitioner. Later, the issue was mediated and
settled on condition that the petitioner would be
allowed to continue in the said house without any
rent till such time the petitioner is able to set
up an independent residential house. Petitioner
submits that he recently came to know that the 4 th
respondent had made a complaint before the
2025:KER:15583
Collector, who in turn forwarded the same to the 2 nd
respondent and proceedings have been initiated to
evict the petitioner and his family from the said
leasehold house. Accordingly, Ext.P2 order was
issued. It is further submitted that on enquiry,
petitioner was informed that an order has been
passed by the Wakf Tribunal for eviction of the
petitioner. Since the petitioner is unaware of the
proceedings and was not heard while adjudicating
the said case, the present proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P2 is illegal and arbitrary.
3. A detailed counter affidavit has been
filed by the additional 5th respondent contending
that the building involved was rented out to the
petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1 for a period of
11 months and he was bound to surrender vacant
possession of the building on the expiry of the
lease period. However, he did not vacate the
building as agreed and continued its occupation
illegally and going by Section 3(ee) of the Wakf
Act, 1995 a person whose tenancy lease or licence
2025:KER:15583
in respect of a Waqf property has expired or has
been terminated by Muthawally or Board is an
"Encroacher" of the property and as per Section 54
of the said Act such encroachment can be removed.
The further averment that some committee members
trespassed into the property of the petitioner is
utter falsehood and without any materials to
support the same. It is further submitted that the
petitioner was illegally occupying the building of
the respondent for several years without paying any
rent. Inspite of repeated demands, he was not ready
to pay a single pie towards rent. Thereupon, the
additional 5th respondent approached the 4th
respondent to remove the encroachment from the Waqf
property. Thereafter, the 4th respondent conducted
an enquiry under Section 54 of the Waqf Act with
notice to the petitioner and found that he is an
encroacher in the Waqf property. Thereafter the 4th
respondent filed OA No.160/2019 before the Waqf
Tribunal, Kozhikode under Section 54(3) of the Waqf
Act, 1995 for granting order of eviction. Though
2025:KER:15583
notice was issued to the petitioner, he did not
appear before the Waqf Tribunal. Ext.R5(a) ex-parte
order was passed directing the petitioner to vacate
the building within 45 days. Inspite of specific
direction in R5(a) order issued by the Waqf
Tribunal, the petitioner did not vacate the
premises. Thereupon, the 4th respondent approached
the 1st respondent, who in turn directed the 2nd
respondent to take necessary steps for evicting the
petitioner from the Waqf premises. Later, Ext.P2
proceedings was initiated by the 2nd respondent and
eviction notice was also issued. After filing of
the writ petition and having obtained an interim
order, the petitioner approached the Waqf Tribunal
for setting aside Ext.R5(a) order and got it set
aside. Thereafter he filed objections in OA No.160
of 2019 and was examined as RW1 in the said
proceedings and the matter was considered afresh
and an order was passed by the Waqf Tribunal
ordering eviction of the petitioner as per
Ext.R5(b). Even thereafter, the petitioner has so
2025:KER:15583
far neither vacated the premises nor challenged
Ext.R5(b) order. He is still continuing in
illegal occupation of the premises without paying
rent.
4. I have heard the rival contentions on both
sides.
5. The contention of the petitioner is that
only when he received Ext.P2 notice and made
enquiry he was informed that the said order of
eviction was issued based an order passed by the
Waqf Tribunal and that he is unaware of the
proceedings before the Tribunal. True, the earlier
order of eviction evidenced by Ext.R5(a) was an ex-
parte order. But later on the same was set aside
and fresh order was passed by the Tribunal as
evident from Ext.R1(b). A perusal of Ext.R1(b)
would reveal that the petitioner fully participated
in the proceedings and has filed chief affidavit
including his contentions and was also examined as
RW1. It is only thereafter considering the rival
contentions on both sides, the eviction order was
2025:KER:15583
passed. Petitioner has not challenged Ext.R1(b)
order of the Tribunal till date.
6. It is seen that the present notice was
issued based on Ext.R1(b) order passed by the Wakf
Tribunal invoking the power under Section 55 of the
Wakf Act, 1995. Taking into consideration the fact
that Ext.R1(b) order has become final and the
petitioner has not challenge the same, I find no
reason to interfere with Ext.P2 proceedings.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
It is made clear that the dismissal of the writ
petition will not stand in the way of the
petitioner challenging Ext.R1(b) order of the Wakf
Tribunal in accordance with law.
sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM,JUDGE
pm
2025:KER:15583
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1787/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DATED
15/01/2014 IN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND
ERSHADUL MUSLIM IN SABHA.
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
13/12/2021 ISSUED PETITIONER BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit-R5(a) True copy of the order dated 05.11.2019
Passed by the Waqf Tribunal in O.A.
160/2019.
Exhibit-R5(b) True copy of the order dated 25.07.2023
Passed by the Waqf Tribunal in O.A.
160/2019.
