P.K. Lohra, J. - (1.) Petitioner, Secretary of the Wakf Committee of Gram Dantala, Tehsil Siwana, District Barmer, has preferred this writ petition praying under-mentioned reliefs: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs and the impugned order dated 04.03.2014 (Annex.2) may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside. Any other appropriate relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper may also be given."
(2.) The apposite facts, for the purpose of this writ petition, are that Chief Executive Officer of Rajasthan Board of Muslim Wakf (for short, 'Board') vide its order dated 16th July 2013 constituted a Wakf Committee for managing the affairs of the properties of village Dantala, Tehsil Siwana, District Barmer, and the petitioner was appointed as Secretary of the Committee. As per the order the term of the Committee was specified as one year. In the order it was specifically mentioned that the Committee shall strictly adhered to the provisions of the Wakf Act 1995 (for short, 'Act of 1995') and the Rules made thereunder. It is also clarified in the order that Committee shall be obliged to handover charge to the Board, Committee constituted by the Board, or any incumbent appointed by the Board. In pursuance of the order dated 16th July 2013, the Committee assumed the charge and started functioning. On 4th of March 2014, the Chief Executive Officer, Wakf Board, passed an order superseding the Wakf Committee, which was appointed earlier by order dated 16th July 2013. Categorising the said order as illegal, the petitioner has pleaded that the same has been issued in contravention of statutory provisions of law. For substantiating the grievances, the petitioner has also taken shelter of sub-section (2) of Section 67 of the Act of 1995. It is specifically pleaded in the writ petition that although petitioner has assailed the said order before the Rajasthan Wakf Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') by way of preferring an appeal but in want of Presiding Officer of the Tribunal the same is not functioning. The petitioner has specifically pleaded in the writ petition that since last more than a year no Presiding Officer is available in the Tribunal. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court to assail the impugned order.
(3.) At the threshold, notices were issued to the respondent. On 28th of May 2014, counsel for the Wakf Board appeared and sought time to file reply. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a request to grant interim protection and therefore while deferring the matter for 7th July 2014, the impugned order dated 4th of March 2014 was kept in abeyance. The said order was further extended on 7th of July 2014 and it remained operative till 18th July 2014.;