- (1.) D. K. Seth, J. Sari Musahid All had filed this kppiication for substitution in place and $tead of deceased Maqsood Ali, the petitioner in the present writ petition. Shri Maqsood Ali participated in the writ petition in the capacity of Mutwalli in the Waqf creatjed by Sher Ali and Moti Begum, Moradabad, It is alleged by the applicant that he is the son of deceased petitioner and therefore he should be substituted. It ia not claimed that he has been appointed as Mutwalli in respect of the Waqf and that he was seeking his subs titution as Mutwalli of the Waqf property. However, by an ap plication dated 25-7-1997 filed on behalf of Sadat Ali, respondent No. 4, it is alleged that Shri Musanid Ali had already been appointed as Mutwalli on 29-1-1997.
(2.) BE that as it may, the application of Musahid for substitution is being allowed subject to objection that might be taken up by respondents. This substitution shall be treated only for the sake of deciding this writ petition and shall not be taken into account for the purpose of any decision by the Board if occasion so arises and the question relating to the rights of the respective parties would remain open for decision by the Board in accordance with law if it is so required to be decided, without being influenced by the substitu tion allowed in the present writ petition. The name of Shri Maqsood Ali be deleted and that of Shri Musahid Ali be substituted. The office will take ap propriate steps in course of one week for amending the cause title of the writ peti tion. After the above application for substitution is allowed Shri V. M. Zaidi, learned Counsel representing the sub stituted heir and Shri A. N. Bhargava, learned Counsel representing respondent No. 4 had agreed that the matter may be taken up for disposal and had accordingly addressed the court on merit of the case.
(3.) I have heard Shri V. M. Zaidi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri A. N. Bhargava learned Counsel for contesting respondent at length. In the present case, order dated 12-3-1993 passed by Controller U. P. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs, Lucknow, being Annexure-8 to the writ petition has been challenged on the ground that the same is contrary to the. directions contained in the Waqf Deed. Inasmuch as according to the directions the Waqfs Board can appoint only one Mutawalli for the Waqf whereas the order hadsought to appoint a commit tee of management. The other ground of challenge is that Shri Maqsood Ali being the only relative of the Waqifs, it is he who could alone be appointed and said Shri Sadat Ali can have no claim for being so appointed. The third point of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Shri Maqsood Ali was a Mutawalli appointed and he had never been removed from the post under Section 55 of the Uttar Pradesh Muslim Waqfs Act, 1960, hereinafter called as the 1960 Act, and as such there cannot be any appointment of anyone else as Mutawalli including the committee of management.;