Madras High Court
M.Sultan Amma Sahib vs The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board on 10 March, 2025
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
W.P.No.8320 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.8320 of 2025
and
W.M.P.No. 9327 of 2025
M.SULTAN AMMA SAHIB ... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE TAMIL NADU WAQF BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFIFCER,
JAFFER SYRANG STREET,
VALLAL SEETHKATHI NAGAR,
CHENNAI – 600 001.
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
NAGAPATTINAM.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF WAQF,
THANJAVUR RANGE,
RAILWAY COLONY, TANJAVURE - 613 001.
4. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,
NAGAPATTINAM MUNICIPALITY,
NAGAPATTINAM.
5. M. MOHAMMED THAHA MARICAR,
MUTHAVALLI,
NAGORE MEERA LABBAI MARICAR WAQF,
7A/103 MOHIDEEN PALLI STREET,
NAGORE – 611 002,
NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT. ... Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
W.P.No.8320 of 2025
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the
issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for records of the third respondent
herein in Na.Ka.New Registration No.288/Va.Ka/Tanjai/2025 dated
06.03.2025, quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.V.Karthikeyan
For R1 : Mr.N.Swathi Priya Rai
For R2 : Mr.S.Rajesh
Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorari, to call for the records
of the third respondent herein in Na.Ka.New Registration No.
288/Va.Ka/Tanjai/2025 dated 06.03.2025, quash the same and pass such
further orders as this Court may deem fit.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would
submit that this is a case of Wakf-al-aulad and that the petitioner is also a
beneficiary in respect of the same. Therefore, the very decision of the
respondents to evict the petitioner is erroneous in law. In any event, even if
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
the petitioner is an encroacher, the respondents must approach the Waqf
Tribunal and only after obtaining an eviction order from the Tribunal, the
petitioner can be evicted from the premises. Without following the procedure
prescribed by law, the impugned notice issued on 06.03.2025 to secure
possession from the petitioner on 11.03.2025 is illegal and therefore, the
petitioner is before this Court.
3. I have considered the said submission made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner.
4. On perusal of the impugned order dated 06.03.2025, it is clear that
the proceedings were taken pursuant to the order in C.R.P.(NPD).Nos. 296
and 2070 of 2007 dated 09.10.2018. A perusal of the judgment of this Court
in the said C.R.P, this Court passed an order directing the petitioner herein to
vacate and hand over possession of the property. The relevant portion in
paragraph No. 21 is extracted hereunder for ready reference:
“21. In view of the above discussions, the order of the
learned Subordinate Judge (Wakf Tribunal), Nagapattinam is
without jurisdiction and therefore, is liable to be set aside. In the
result, these Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and the order
passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge (Wakf
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
Tribunal), Nagapattinam in W.O.P.No. 1 of 2004 dated 11.11.2005
is set aside. The order of the petitioner Board dated 24.05.2007 is
confirmed and the respondents 1 to 6 herein are directed to hand
over possession of property described in the Commissioner's
report within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order failing which the petitioner Board shall
immediately thereafter initiate proceedings under Section 55 of the
Wakf Act. It is needless to state that meanwhile, it is open to the
Wakf Board to approach the Commissioner of Municipality,
Nagapattinam to take immediate steps to demolish the
unauthorized constructions put up on the property. The
respondents 1 to 6 shall pay costs to the petitioner. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.”
5. Therefore, when the petitioner is the third respondent in the said
C.R.P. and when there is an express order of this Court directing the
petitioner to hand over possession of the property, it is baffling that, till date,
the order of this Court remains only on paper. The petitioner, as well as the
others, if they have not handed over possession, are in contempt of the orders
of this Court. This is not a case where the direction was given to the
respondents to take action in the manner known to law. The adjudication in
the C.R.P and the further orders thereon are decisions in the manner known to
law and the petitioner has no choice but to hand over possession of the
property and comply with the order of this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
6. In view thereof, finding no merit, this writ petition stands dismissed.
The respondents are directed to proceed strictly to implement the orders of
this Court. It is the duty of everyone concerned to ensure that the order of the
Court is complied with and does not remain just a piece of paper.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
10.03.2025
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nsl
To
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFIFCER,
THE TAMIL NADU WAQF BOARD,
JAFFER SYRANG STREET,
VALLAL SEETHKATHI NAGAR,
CHENNAI – 600 001.
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
NAGAPATTINAM.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF WAQF,
THANJAVUR RANGE,
RAILWAY COLONY, TANJAVURE - 613 001.
4. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,
NAGAPATTINAM MUNICIPALITY,
NAGAPATTINAM.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl
10.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 01:46:17 pm )
