- (1.) SRI Syed Aftab Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a Mutwalli of the property owned by U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board. He was removed from the office of the Mutwalli but the learned Tribunal has granted the stay. The suit was proceeded thereafter and the lower court has dismissed the suit (No. 259/74) for non-prosecution on 24.03.2009. He also submits that after knowing the dismissal of the aforesaid suit, an application was moved on 27th March, 2009 to recall the order dated 24.03.2009, which is still pending. So he prays that necessary directions may be issued to the court below to decide the recall application expeditiously.
(2.) ON the other hand, Sri Mohd. Sayeed, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 i.e. U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs submits that originally Sheikh Shahid Ali Meeni was appointed as Mutwalli and after his death Sri Sheikh Shahnawaz Ali Meenai was appointed as Mutwalli who also died on 12.06.2010. Since, he was unmarried and no one is there to be substituted in his place, the petitioner has moved an application for holding the office of the Mutwalli and at present the office of the Mutwalli is still lying vacant. After hearing both the parties at length and on perusal of the record, it appears that litigation was started in the year of 1974 and from time to time the earlier Mutwallis as well as the petitioner got adjournments for one reason or another. So the case was not decided. However, finally when the petitioner was not cooperated in the proceedings, the case was dismissed for non-prosecution on 24.03.2009 by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow. Since the matter was too old about 40 years and for keeping it pending for one reason or another is the misuse of legal process. Earlier, on 4.02.2009, 03.03.2009 and 07.03.2009, the petitioner did not appear before the court below and remained absent. It means that he was not serious to pursue his case but was interested to delay the same for one pretext or another. When the petitioner has not cooperated and unattended the court inspite of date fixed by the court below in the presence of learned counsel for the petitioner, then the lower court has rightly dismissed the suit. A case cannot be kept pending for about 40 years for want of cooperation from the petitioner. Needless to mention that the litigation should come to an end as per the maxim INTEREST REIPUBLICAE UT SIT FINIS LITIGUM and BONI JUDICES EST LITES DISIMERE NE LIS EX LITRE ORITUR, which means this litigation must come to an end and it cannot be kept alive for indefinite period.
(3.) HENCE, no direction can be issued to the court below regarding disposal of the Misc. Case No. 37-C of 2009 "Sheikh Shahid Ali Meenai versus U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs" as prayed by the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed.;