MRS. FARKHONDEH KHANUM Vs. THE BOARD OF WAKFS, WEST BENGAL & ANR.
LAWS(CAL)-2016-11-4
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on
November 04,2016
Mrs. Farkhondeh Khanum
Appellant
VERSUS
The Board Of Wakfs, West Bengal And Anr.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
R V. THAMES MAGISTRATES' COURT,EX PARTE POLEMIS [REFERRED TO]RADHAPADA JANA VS. JNANENDRA NATH BERA AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]
GOLAM MUSTAPHA AND ANR. VS. THE BOARD OF WAKF,WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
NAZIR AHMED VS. KING EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT BANK LIMITED DELHI VS. EMPLOYEES OF BHARAT BANK LTD [REFERRED TO]
PROVINCE OF BOMBAY VS. KHUSHALDAS S ADVANI SINCE DECEASED AND AFTER HIM HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE A GOVINDRAM KHUSHALDAS AND B RAMCHAND KHUSHALDAS [REFERRED TO]
K S RASHID AND SON VS. INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION COMMISSION [REFERRED TO]
MAHANTH RAM DAS VS. GANGA DAS [REFERRED TO]
A V VENKATESWARAN COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS BOMBAY VS. RAMCHAND SOBHRAJ WADHWANI [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SUGAR MILLS LIMITED MEERUT VS. LAKSHMI CHAND [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI AND COMPANY VS. ANANT R DESHP NDE [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAMAN IRON FOUNDRY:AIR FOAM INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
ALL PARTY HILL LEADERS CONFERENCE SHILLONG VS. CAPTAIN W A SANGMA [REFERRED TO]
UPPER INDIA PUBLISHING HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
RAFIQ VS. MUNSHILAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. YOGENDRA SINGH COL RETIRED [REFERRED TO]
INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA VS. L K RATNA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. RAMESHWARA RICE MILLS THTRTHAHALLI:K KRISHNAPPA NAIDU AND CO :S THIPPA REDDY [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTO HOLLOHAN VS. ZACHILLHU [REFERRED TO]
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION VS. REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
MODERN STEEL INDUSTRIES VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
HARBANSLAL SAHNIA VS. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. P LAXMI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
JAI SINGH VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
BOARD OF WAKF WEST BENGAL VS. ANIS FATMA BEGUM [REFERRED TO]
NIVEDITA SHARMA VS. CELLULAR OPERATORS ASSN OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PROSAD KUMAR MONDAL VS. COMMISSIONER OF KRISHNAGORE MUNICIPALITY [REFERRED TO]
STATE WAKF BOARD MADRAS VS. ABDUL AZEEZ SAHIB [REFERRED TO]
T P VISHNU KUMAR VS. CANARA BANK P N ROAD [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. CHHABIL DASS AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
SAMEER SURESH GUPTA TR. PA HOLDER VS. RAHUL KUMAR AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
JACKY VS. TINY @ ANTONY [REFERRED TO]
ZIAUL HAQUE VS. MAHAMMADUL HAQUE [REFERRED TO]
BALAJI NAGAR RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
MALAY KUMAR BERA VS. RABINDRA NATH BERA [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA KUMAR RAY CHOUDHURY VS. COLLECTOR OF CALCUTTA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
MIR DARA SHEKO,J. -
(1.)The application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner assailing the order of removal of the
petitioner and her mother Narges Khanum and her sister Mrs. Rokhsandeh
Khanum from the post of Mutawalliship of the Wakf Estate namely "Mirza
Ali Akbar Al-Al-Aulad Wakf" under Clauses (j) and (k) of Section 64(1) of
the Wakf Act, 1955 pursuant to the resolution dated 16.10.2008 adopted
by the Board of Wakfs.
(2.)Background of the matter, is that the father of the petitioner created the wakf specifying as to who would be the Mutawallis and how or by whom and in what mode such wakf property would have to be managed in taking action for its development.
(3.)One Ram Bilash Agarwal was chosen by the petitioner to develop the wakf property with approval of the Board of Wakf, but it had to be cancelled. For the 2nd time another Kamal Singh Baid was chosen for its developing under approval of the Board of wakf but the same also could not be materialised since Kamal Singh Baid had no promoter licence. Therefore ultimately agreement between the petitioner and Kamal Singh Baid was terminated. Kamal Singh Baid thereafter attempted on and again at first in City Civil Court, then in the Civil Court at Sealdah, and lastly, in the High Court, to get the said agreement resumed, but could not succeed.
;
(2.)Background of the matter, is that the father of the petitioner created the wakf specifying as to who would be the Mutawallis and how or by whom and in what mode such wakf property would have to be managed in taking action for its development.
(3.)One Ram Bilash Agarwal was chosen by the petitioner to develop the wakf property with approval of the Board of Wakf, but it had to be cancelled. For the 2nd time another Kamal Singh Baid was chosen for its developing under approval of the Board of wakf but the same also could not be materialised since Kamal Singh Baid had no promoter licence. Therefore ultimately agreement between the petitioner and Kamal Singh Baid was terminated. Kamal Singh Baid thereafter attempted on and again at first in City Civil Court, then in the Civil Court at Sealdah, and lastly, in the High Court, to get the said agreement resumed, but could not succeed.
;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.