http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 17  

PETITIONER: BOARD OF MUSLIM WAKFS, RAJASTHAN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: RADHA KRISHNA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT24/10/1978

BENCH: SEN, A.P. (J) BENCH: SEN, A.P. (J) SINGH, JASWANT PATHAK, R.S.

CITATION:  1979 AIR  289            1979 SCR  (2) 148  1979 SCC  (2) 468  CITATOR INFO :  R          1981 SC2198  (16)  RF         1992 SC1083  (10,11,12,15)

ACT:      Wakfs Act,  1954-Ss. 4  and 6-Scope  of-Commissioner of Wakfs, if  had jurisdiction  to hold enquiry whether certain property was wakf property- Failure of stranger to file suit within time allowed by s. 6(1)-Special rule of limitation-If applicable to  him-Inclusion of  property  in  the  list  of wakfs- If final and conclusive.

HEADNOTE:      To  provide   for   the   better   administration   and supervision of  Wakfs, the  Wakfs Act  1954, sought to bring the management  of wakfs under the supervision of the State. The Act envisages the appointment of a Commissioner of Wakfs for the purpose of survey of wakf properties existing at the time of  the commencement  of the  Act. The  Commissioner is enjoined to  submit his report to the State Government after making such  enquiries as  he may  consider necessary. While making enquiries the Commissioner is invested with powers as are vested  in  a  Civil  Court  under  the  Code  of  Civil Procedure. Section  6  of  the  Act  provides  that  if  any question  arises   as  to   whether  a  particular  property specified in  the list  of wakfs published under s. 5(2) was wakf property  or not  and such  other related  matters, the Board of  Muslim Wakfs  or the  Mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested  therein may  institute a  suit in a Civil Court for decision of the question.      Respondents 1  and 2  were mortgagee-purchasers  of the property in  dispute, which was claimed to be wakf property. Respondent. No.  3 in his application to the Commissioner of Wakfs alleged  that  the  property  in  dispute  being  wakf property its  transfer by  the mutawalli  to the respondents was invalid  and prayed  that the  property be taken over by the wakf  committee. While  denying  that  the  property  in dispute was  wakf property  respondents 1  and  2  contended before the  Commissioner that he had no jurisdiction to make an enquiry  whether a  particular property was wakf property or not.  The Commissioner  rejected  these  contentions  and submitted a  report to  the State  Government. On receipt of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 17  

the Commissioner’s report the Board of Muslim Wakfs included the property in the list of wakfs in the Stat.      In the  respondents’ Writ Petition, the High Court held (i) that the jurisdiction of the Board of Wakfs was confined to matters  of  administration  of  the  wakfs  and  not  to adjudication of  questions of title and that the Act did not invest either  the Board  or the  Commissioner with power to decide the question whether a property belonged to a wakf or not and therefore the Commissioner had no jurisdiction under s. 4(3)  of the  Act to  enquire whether or not the property was wakf property and (ii) that the failure of a stranger to the wakf  to institute  a  suit  in  a  court  of  competent jurisdiction within  a period  of one  year on  the question whether a particular property was wakf property or not could not make the inclusion of such property in the list of wakfs final and conclusive. 149      In appeal  to this  Court it was contended on behalf of the appellants  that   (i) the  words "for  the  purpose  of making a  survey of  wakf properties"  are  wide  enough  to confer  power   on  the   Commissioner  to  investigate  and adjudicate upon  the question  whether a particular property was or  was not  wakf  property  and  (ii)  failure  of  the respondents to  file a  suit within  the time  allowed by s, 6(1) made the inclusion of the property in the list of wakfs final and  conclusive. The  word "therein" occurring in "any person interested therein" in s. 6 ( 1 ) qualifies the words "wakf property"  and not "person interested in the wakfs" as wrongly assumed by the High Court.      Dismissing the appeal to this Court ^      HELD: While the High Court was right in determining the scope of  s. 6(1), it was clearly in error in curtailing the ambit and  scope of enquiry by the Commissioner under s. 4(3 ) . [160 E]      1. (a)  The Commissioner  of  wakfs  acted  within  his jurisdiction in  holding the  disputed property  to be  wakf property. [168 C]      (b) The whole purpose of the survey of the wakfs by the Commissioner under  s. 4(1)  is to inform the Board of Wakfs as to  existence of the wakfs in the State in order that all such wakfs  should be  brought  under  the  supervision  and control of the Board. [160 D]      (c) The  words "for the purpose of making a survey" are the  key   to  the  construction  of  the  section.  If  the Commissioner has  the power  to make  a  survey  it  is  but implicit that  in the  exercise  of  such  power  he  should enquire whether  or not a wakf exists. The making of such an enquiry is  a necessary  concomitant of the power to survey. The High  Court was,  therefore, wrong  in  holding  to  the contrary. [162 A-Bl      (d) It  would be  illogical to hold that while making a survey  of   wakf  properties  existing  in  the  State  the Commissioner of  wakfs  should  have  no  power  to  enquire whether a  particular property  was wakf  property  or  not. After making  the survey  the Commissioner  is  required  to submit a  report to  the State  Government in  regard to the several matters  referred to  in clauses (a) to (f) thereof. There may  be a  dispute as between the Board, the mutawalli or a person interested in the wakf, as regards the existence of wakf i.e. whether a particular property is wakf property, whether it is a Shia wakf or a Sunni wakf, the extent of the property attached  to the wakf, the nature and object of the wakf  and   so  on.   While  making  such  an  enquiry,  the Commissioner is  invested with  the powers vested in a Civil

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 17  

Court under  the Code  of Civil  Procedure, 1908. In view of the  comprehensive  provisions  contained  in  the  Act  the enquiry which  the Commissioner  makes is  not purely  of an administrative  nature  but  partakes  of  a  quasi-judicial character in  respect of persons falling within the scope of s. 6(1). [161 F; C-E]      (e) The  power  of  the  Commissioner  to  survey  wakf properties or  to enquire  and investigate  into the several matters set  out in  sub-section (3)  cannot be curtailed by taking recourse  to s.  4(S). Sub-section (S) only lays down that, if  during an enquiry any dispute arises as to whether a particular  wakf is a Shia wakf or Sunni wakf and if there are clear  indications in the deed of wakf as to its nature, the dispute shall be decided on the basis of 150 such deed.  It, therefore, makes the wakf deed conclusive as to  the  nature  of  the  wakf  Sub-section  (5)  cannot  be projected into  sub-section  (1)  determining  the  question whether a  certain property  is a  wakf property or not. Nor does it  enter into  an enquiry as to several of the matters adverted to  in some of the clauses of sub-section (3). [162 D-E]      (f) Moreover s. 6 and s. 6(1) clearly envisage that the enquiry by the Commissioner was not confined to the question as to  whether a  particular wakf  was a  Shia Wakf or Sunni Wakf. It  might also  embrace a dispute is to whether a wakf existed or not. [162 H]      2. (a)  Where a  stranger is  a non  Muslim and  is  in possession  of   certain  property,  his  right.  title  and interest therein  cannot be  put in  jeopardy merely because the property is included in the list of wakfs. Such a person is not  required to  file a  suit for  a declaration  of his title within  a period  of one  year. The  special  rule  of limitation laid down in proviso to s. 6(1) is not applicable to him.  In other  words, the list published by the Board of Wakfs under  s. 5(2)  can be  challenged by  him by filing a suit for  declaration of  title even after the expiry of the period of  one year,  if the  necessity of  filing such suit arises. h 167 A-B]      (b) The  word "therein"  occurring in s. 6(1) after the words "any person interested therein" must necessarily refer to the "Wakf" which immediately precedes it. It cannot refer to the wakf property. Section 6 ( 1 ) enumerates the persons who can  file suits  and also  the questions  in respect  of which such  suits can  be filed.  In enumerating the persons who are  empowered to  file suits  under this provision only the Board,  the mutawalli  of  the  Wakf;  and  "any  person interested therein",  thereby necessarily meaning any person interested in  the wakfs, are listed. Its provisions empower only those  who are  interested in  the wakfs  to  institute suits. [164 E-Fl      Sirajul Hag  Khan &  Ors. v. The Sunni Central Board of Wakf, U.P. Ors., [1959] SCR 1287, referred to.      (c) The word "therein" in s. 6(1) must mean "any person interested in  a wakf"  as defined in s. 3(h). The object of the section  is to narrow down the dispute between the Board of Wakfs,  the Mutawalli  and the  person interested  in the wakf as defined in s. 3(h). [165 H]      (d) The  right of the respondents 1 and 2 in respect of the disputed  property, if at all they have any, will remain unaffected by the impugned Notification. They are at liberty to bring  a Suit  for the  establishment of  their right and title, if any, to the property. [168-E]

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 17  

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No. 166 of 1969.      From the  Judgment and  order dated  4- 5-1966  of  the Rajasthan High  Court in  D.B. Civil  Misc. Writ  No. 74  of 1965.      M. N.  Phadke, M. Qamaruddin, Mrs. M. Qamaruddin and V. M. Phadke for the Appellant.      S. S. Ray, S. M. Jain, D. D. Patodia and S. K. Jain for Respondents 1 and 2. 151      Appeal set down Ex parte against RR. 3 and 4.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      SEN, J.  This appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment  of the  Rajasthan High Court dated May 4, 1966 holding that  inclusion of the disputed property in the list of wakfs  published by  the Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan under sub-s.  (2) of  s. 5  of title  Wakf Act,  1954 is not binding on  the respondents  No6. 1  and  2,  the  mortgagee purchasers and restraining the Board from taking only sleeps under s. 36B of the Act for evicting them from the same.      The  subject   matter  in  dispute  is  a  two-storeyed building, knows  as Dharamshala  or Musafirkhana, situate on Mirza Ismail Road at Jaipur. The building was constructed by the late  Haji Mohammad  Ali Khan,  a Sessions  Judge of the erstwhile Princely State of Jaipur, who owned a considerable estate, on  a plot of land admeasuring 5 bighas and 3 biswas obtained from  the Mehakma  Mensa  Aliya  Council  with  the approval of the Ruler of Jaipur under a Patta dated February 23, 1886  for construction  of a  Haveli and Dharamshala. It appears that  Haji Mohammad Ali Khan before his death in the year 1912, had executed two wills, one on February 17, 191 O and the other on July 1, 1911, by which after making several bequests he  acknowledged that  he had  dedicated  the  said property  in  wakf,  for  its  use  as  a  Dharammshala  and appointed his son Ehsen Ali Khan as its Mutawalli. After the death of  Haji Mohammad  Ali Khan,  there  was  a  suit  for partition of the property brought by his son Faiyaz Ali Khan against his brother Ehsari Ali Khan, being original Suit No. 128 of 1930 and the building was left out of partition being wakf property.      It, however,  appears that the mutawalli Ehsan Ali Khan mortgaged the  property with possession, with Seth Bijaylal, father  of   respondent  No.  2,  and  Bhuramal,  father  of respondent No.  1, for  Rs. 7,999,’- and executed a mortgage deed dated  July 30, 1944 in Their favour for the purpose or purchasing a strip of land in front of the building from the Municipal  Council   Jaipur   and   thereafter   constructed verandahs on  the ground  floor and  the  first  floor.  For making this  construction, he  raised a  further loan of Rs. 9,999/- by  effecting a  second mortgage  by  executing  the mortgage deed  dated July  7, 1945  in favour  of  the  said mortgagees. the  respondents Nos.  1  and  2  purchased  the ground floor  of the  building from  Ehsan Ali  Khan for Rs. 19,999/- by  means of  a registered sale dead dated November 23, 1954. The consideration was applied towards satisfaction of the  two previous  mortgages. Thereafter,  they purchased the first  floor of  the said  building  from  him  for  Rs. 13,999/- by  means of  a registered sale deed dated July 31, 1956. 152      The wakf  Act,  1954  was  extended  to  the  State  of Rajasthan on  February 1,  1955. The  Board of Muslim wakfs, Rajashthan was constituted by the State Government on August

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 17  

6,  1962   in  accordance  with  s.  9  and  thereafter  the Government appointed a Commissioner of Wakfs under sub-s.(1) of s.4  for the  purpose of making survey of wakf properties existing in  the State,  at the  date of the commencement of the Act.  On August  30, 1962,  one Shauket  Ali  Khan,  the respondent No.  3  applied  to  the  Commissioner  of  Wakfs alleging that  the aforesaid  property was wakf property and therefore, its  transfer by  Ehsan Ali  Khan,  who  was  its mutawalli, in  favour of  the respondents  Nos. 1  and 2 was invalid  and   consequently  prayed  that  the  property  be declared to  be Wakf  property and possession of the same be handed over to the wakf Committee. The Commissioner of Wakfs accordingly issued  notice to  the respondents. Nos. 1 and 2 the mortgagee  purchasers. In  response to  the notice,  the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 appeared before the Commissioner of Wakfs  on  September  19,  1962  and  raised  a  preliminary objection as  to the  jurisdiction denying that the disputed property  was   wakf  property   and  contended   that   the Commissioner of Wakfs had no jurisdiction to make an enquiry as to whether a particular property is wakf property or not. The Commissioner  of Wakfs  by his order Dated September 19, 1962 over-ruled  the objection.  Thereupon, the  respondents Nos. 1  and 2  filled a  writ petition  before the Rajasthan High Court,  but the  High Court  by its order dated October 11, 1962  dismissals the  petition liming observing that the Commissioner had  obviously no  jurisdiction j to decide any question relating to the title of the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 or to eject them from the property without taking recourse to a  civil suit.  The Commissioner  of Wakfs, however, felt that he  was not  bound by  these observations  of the  High Court since  he was not served with a notice and accordingly decided to  proceed  with  the  enquiry.  In  .  consequence thereof, the  respondents Nos. 1 and 2 had to participate in the proceedings.  On October 19, 1962 they filed their reply before the  Commissioner of  Wakfs and  joined issue  on the question as  to  whether  the  disputed  property  was  wakf property or  not. In  their reply  they pleaded,  inter alia that the  property was  not a  wakf and  that the  wills had indeed been  cancelled in  a suit. The Commissioner of Wakfs by his  report dated  December is,  1964 on the basis of the evidence led  before him,  held the  disputed property to be wakf property  recommended that  it be recorded as such, and accordingly, forwarded  a report to that effect to the State Government as required under sub-s.(3) of s.4.      On receipt  of the  report of the Commissioner of Wakfs forwarded to  it by the State Government under sub-s. (1) of s. S, the Board of Muslim 153 Wakfs published a notification for inclusion of the property in dispute  A in  the list of Wakfs existing in the State in the Rajasthan  Rajpatra dated  December 2, 1965. Thereafter, the respondents  Nos. ]  and 2, filed a writ petition in the High Court  challenging the  legality and  validity  of  the proceedings taken  by the  Commissioner  of  Wakfs.  It  was contended that  on the  basis of  such report,  the Board of Muslim Wakfs  was not  entitled to include their property in the list of wakfs published under sub-s.(2) of s.5.      In allowing  the petition, the High Court held that the entire scheme  or the  Wakf Act,  1954, indicates  that  the Board of  Wakfs  jurisdiction  is  confined  to  matters  of administration of  the wakfs  and  not  to  adjudication  of questions of title. In view, it was evident that the Act did not invest  the Board  of Wakfs or the Commissioner of Wakfs with the  power to  decide the  question whether  a property belonged to  a wakf  or not;  and more  so, where  a  person

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 17  

claiming title  is a  stranger to  the wakf.  It accordingly held that  a Commissioner of Wakfs appointed under sub-s.(1) of s.(4)  of the  Act has no jurisdiction under sub-s.(3) of s. 4  to enquire  whether or  not a certain property is wakf property when  such a dispute is raised by such a person. It further held  that the  object of s. 6 is to narrow down the dispute between  the Board  of Wakfs,  the mutawalli and the person  interested   in  the  wakf,  as  defined  in  s.  3. Consequently, the  High Court  held that  the failure  of  a stranger to  the wakf  to institute  a suit  in a  court  of competent jurisdiction  for a  decision  of  such  question, namely, whether  a particular property is a wakf property or not, cannot  make the inclusion of such property in the list of wakfs  published by the Board under sub-s. (2) of s. 5 of the Act final and conclusive under sub-s. (4) of s. 6 of the Act. It  also held  that the  Board  is  not  invested  with jurisdiction to  enquire into  and decide  the questions  of title to,  or possession  of, the  properties  belonging  to third parties under s. 27 of the Act.      It is argued for the appellant, firstly, that the words ’for the  purpose of making a survey of wakf properties’ are wide enough  and confer  ample power on the Commissioner ’to investigate and  adjudicate’ upon  the  question  whether  a certain property  is wakf  property or not during the course of his survey of. wakf properties in the State of Rajasthan; and secondly, the failure of the respondents Nos. l and 2 to file a suit within the time allowed by sub-s. (1) of s. 6 of the Act  makes the inclusion of the disputed property in the list of  wakfs published  by the  Board of  Wakfs under sub- s.(2) of  s.5, final  and  conclusive.  Tn  support  of  the contentions, it  is urged  that the  word ’therein’  in  the expression ’any  per- son  interested therein’  appearing in sub-s.(1) of  s.6, qualify  title words ’wakf property’ and, therefore, the expression ’any person interested 817SCI/78 154 therein’ cannot,  in the  context in  which it appears, mean ’person interested  in a  wakf’ as defined in s. 3(h) of the Act, as  wrongly assumed by the High Court. It is therefore, urged that  the right of suit given under s. 6(1) of the Act can be availed of by a person affected by the publication of the list  of wakfs  under sub-s.(2) of s.5, i.e. it includes even a stranger.      In reply,  it is submitted on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1  and 2,  that the scope of s. 6 is to narrow down the dispute between  the Board  of Wakfs,  the mutawalli and any person interested  in the wakf, as defined in s. 3(h). It is urged that  the High  Court was, therefore, right in holding that 6  refers only  to such a dispute and cannot affect the right and title of a stranger to the wakf, particularly of a person belonging  to  another  religious  denomination.  The submission is that the word ’therein’ in sub-s. (1) of s. 6, in the context and setting in which it appears, does not fit in with  the words  ’wakf property’  in the  collocation  of words,  but  qualifies  the  words  ’the  wakf’  immediately presiding it.  It is  said that  the word ’therein’ has been used to avoid repetition of the words ’the wakf’, and not to extend the  ambit of the section to persons who fall outside the scope of the expression ’person interested in a wakf’ as defined  in   s.3(h).  It  is,  therefore,  urged  that  the respondents Nos.  1 and  2 are wholly outside the purview of s.6(1) and,  therefore, they  must necessarily  fall outside the scope  of the  enquiry under,  s.4(1), as the provisions contained in s.4, 5 and 6 form part of an integrated scheme. It is  pointed out that on the terms of s.4 the Commissioner of Wakfs  has no  power’ to enquire whether or not a certain

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 17  

property is  wakf property  when such dispute is raised by a stranger to  the wakf.  In support  of the  contention,  the language of  s. 4  is contrasted with that of s.27 and it is said that, while the Board of Wakfs has the power to hold an enquiry as to whether a particular property is wakf property or not under s.27, the Commissioner of Wakfs has no power to hold such an enquiry.      In order  to appreciate  the implications  of the rival contentions, it  Is necessary not only to examine the scheme of  the   Act  but  also  the  purpose  and  object  of  the legislation.      The Wakf  Act, 1954,  "the Act", as the preamble shows, was enacted  ’to provide  for the  better administration and supervision of  wakfs’. The avowed object and purpose of the Act was  to bring  the management  of Wakfs, though it vests immediately in  a mutawalli,  subject to the supervision the State. It  was enacted  to replace  the Mussalman  Wakf Act, 1923, which  merely provided  for the  submission of audited accounts by mutawallis, and was found to be wanting in 155 several respects  and really not of much practical value. It was found  k that proceedings could be successfully defeated simply on  the plea taken by the mutawalli that there was no wakf. To  remove the  lacunae, the  Mussalman  Wakf  (Bombay Amendment) Act,  1935 amended  the Act. The Bengal Wakf Act, 1934 was  enacted to  create a machinery for the supervision of wakfs  in Bengal.  The United Provinces followed suit and the United  Provinces  Muslim  Wakf  Act,  1936  was  passed creating a  Central Wakf Board. Similarly, Bihar also passed a legislation almost on the same lines. The working of these Acts  brought   out  the   necessity  for  one  uniform  and consolidated legislation  by the  Center. It  was with  this view that the Wakf Act 1954 was enacted.      The scheme of the Act may be briefly indicated. Section 2 makes  the Act  applicable to all wakfs in India except to Durgah Khawaja  Saheb,  Ajmer.  Section  3  defines  certain terms, and  the  term  ’wakf’  and  the  expression  ’person interested in a wakf’ have been defined as follows:           "3.(h) ’person  interested in  a wakf’  means  any      person who  is entitled  to receive  any  pecuniary  or      other benefits from the wakf and includes,-           (i)  any person  who has  a right to worship or to                perform  any  religious  rite  in  a  mosque,                idgah, imambara,  dargah,  Khangah,  maqbara,                graveyard or  any other Religious institution                connected with  the wakf or to participate in                any religious or charitable institution under                the wakf;           (ii) the wakif and any descendant of the wakif and                the mutawalli.           (1) ’wakf’  means the  permanent dedication  by  a      person professing  Islam of  any movable or irremovable      property for  any purpose  recognised by the Muslim law      as pious, religious or charitable and includes           (i)  a wakf by user;           (ii) grants (including mashrut-ul-khidmat) for any                purpose  recognised  by  the  Muslim  law  as                pious, religious or charitable; and           (iii)a wakf-alal-aulad  to the extent to which the                property  is   dedicated  for   any   purpose                recognised by  Muslim law as pious, religious                or charitable;           and  ’wakif’   means  any   person   making   such           dedication.’ 156

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 17  

    The  Act   consists  of   several  chapters   and   can conveniently be  divided into  three parts.  The first  part relates to the survey of wakfs. Chapter II is headed ’Survey of Wakfs’.  Sub-section (1)  of  s.  4  empowers  the  State Government to  appoint for  the State  by a  notification  a Commission of Wakfs for the purpose of making survey of wakf properties existing  at the  time of the commencement of the Act. Sub-section  (3) enjoins the Commissioner to submit his report to  the State Government after making such enquiry as he may  consider necessary  and the report is to contain the following particulars namely:           (a)  the number  of wakfs  in the State, or as the                case may  be, any  part thereof,  showing the                Shia Wakfs and  Sunni Wakfs separately;           (b)  the nature and objects of each wakf;           (c)  the gross income of the property comprised in                each wakf;           (d)  the amount of land revenue, cesses, rates and                taxes payable in respect of such property;           (e)   the expenses  incurred in the realisation of                the income  and the pay or other remuneration                of the mutawalli of each wakf; and           (f)  such other  particulars relating to each wakf                as may be prescribed." Sub-section (4)  enjoins that the Commissioner, while making such enquiry,  shall have  certain powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, namely, summoning and examining any witness, requiring the discovery and production  of any  document, re  questioning any public record from any court or office, issuing commissions for the examination of  any witness  or accounts,  making any  local inspection or  local inspection  etc. Sub-section (5) of s.4 runs thus:           "(5) If,  during any  such  inquiry,  any  dispute      arises as  to whether  a particular wakf is a Shia wakf      or Sunni  wakf and  there are  clear indications in the      deed of  wakf as  to its  nature, the  dispute shall be      decided on the basis of such deed."      Section 5  provides for  publication of a list of wakfs and is as follows:           "5.(1) on  receipt of  a report  under sub-section      (3) of  Section 4, the State Government shall forward a      copy of the same to the Board. 157           (2) The  Board shall  examine the report forwarded      to it   under  sub-section  (1)  and  publish,  in  the      official (Gazette,  a list  of wakfs  existing  in  the      State, or  as the case may be, the part of the State to      which  the   report  relates,   and   containing   such      particulars as may be prescribed."      Section 6,  which relates  to adjudication  of  dispute regarding wakfs, B so far as material, reads:           "6.(1) If any question arises whether a particular      property specified  as wakf property in a list of wakfs      published under  sub-section (2)  of the  section 5  is      wakf property  or not  or whether  a wakf  specified in      such list is a Shia wakf or Sunni wakf the Board or the      mutawalli of  the wakf or any person interested therein      may institute  a suit  in a  civil court  of  competent      jurisdiction for  the decision  of the question and the      decision of  the civil  court in respect of such matter      shall be. final:           Provided that no such suit shall be entertained by      the civil  court after  the expire of one year from the      date of  the public  cation of the list of wakfs under’

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 17  

    sub-section (2) of section 5. . .. . .. . .. ...... ... . .. ....... ..... ........           (4) The  list of wakfs published under sub-section      (2) of  section S  shall,  unless  it  is  modified  in      pursuance of  a decision  of the civil court under sub-      section (1), be final and conclusive."      Chapter IIA  is about  the constitution  of the Central Wakf Council,  with which  we are not concerned. Chapter III provides for  establishment of  a Board of Wakfs and defines the nature of its duties, powers and functions. This chapter also provides  for certain  incidental matters.  Sub-section (1) of  section 15 provides that the general superintendence of all  wakfs  in  a  State  shall  vest  in  the  Board  so established for  the State,  and it shall be the duty of the Board to ensure that the wakfs under its superintendence are properly maintained,  controlled and  administered  and  the income thereof  is duly  applied to  the objects and for the purpose for  which such wakfs were created or intended. Sub- section (2) enumerates the various functions of the Board.      The next  stage is  that of registration of wakfs. That subject is  dealt with  in Chapter  IV. Section 25 lays down that  every  wakf,  whether  created  before  or  after  the commencement of  the Act,  shall be registered at the office of the  Board. Section  26 requires  the Board to maintain a register of wakfs. Under s. 27, the Board is invested 158 with the  power to decide whether a certain property is wakf property and reads as follows:           "27. (1)  The Board may itself collect information      regarding any  property which  it has reason to believe      to be  wakf property and if any question arises whether      a particular  property  is  wakf  property  or  not  or      whether a  wakf is  a Sunni wakf or a Shia Wakf, it may      after making  such inquiry  as it  may deem fit, decide      the question.           (2) The  decision of  the Board  on  any  question      under sub-section (1) shall, unless revoked or modified      by a civil court of competent jurisdiction, be final."      Section 28  empowers the Board to direct a mutawalli to apply for  the registration  of a  wakf  or  to  supply  any information regarding a wakf, and the Board may itself cause the wakf  to be  registered or  May at  any time  amend  the register of wakfs.      The third  stage  then  arises.  After  completing  the survey and  finalising the  registration of wakfs, the Board which is  an administrative  body, is empowered to supervise and  administer   wakf  property.   Chapter  V   deals  with mutawallis and  wakf  accounts.  This  chapter  provides  in detail as  to how  mutawalli shall  submit  budget  and  tho accounts and in what manner the Board will be exercising its control over  the wakf  properties. Section  36A relates  to transfer of  immovable property  of wakfs. According to this section, no  transfer of  the wakf property is valid without the previous  sanction of  the Board.  Section 36B  empowers ‘the Board  to recover  certain wakf  properties transferred without the  previous sanction  of the  Board by  sending  a requisition to  the Collector.  Chapter VI  relates  to  the finance of  tho Board.  Chapter VII  to judicial proceedings and Chapter  VIII to  miscellaneous matters.  It would  thus appear that  the Act  is a  complete code  dealing with  the better administration and supervision of wakfs.      The High Court, in its considered opinion, in the light of the historical background and precedents, observed: "           The present  Act No.  29 of  1954 is,  no doubt an      improvement on the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923, but in our

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 17  

    view, this  also does not empower the Board of Wakfs to      decide the  question whether  a particular  property is      wakf property  or not, if such a dispute is raised by a      person who is a stranger to wakf."      There is  a considerable body of authority interpreting s. 10  of the Mussalman Wakf Act 1923, in favour of the view that where 159 the existence  of a wakf was itself in dispute, the District Judge had no jurisdiction to inquire into its existence, and the matter  could be  settled only  by instituting a regular suit. The  question came up for consideration before several High Courts  in India  as will  appear from Nasrulla Khan v. Wajid Ali,  (1) Wahid  Hasan v.  Abdul Rahman,(2)  Syed  Ali Mohammed v.  Collector ff  Bhagalpur,(3) Mohammad  Baqar  v. Mohammed Qasim,(4)  Nanha Shah  v. Abdul Hasan,(5) and Abdul Hussain v.  Mohmmad Ebrahim  Riza.(x) The  general trend  of opinion was  that the  District Judge  in  dealing  with  in application under  s. 10) of that Act had, in the absence of a clear  provision in that behalf, no jurisdiction to try an issue as  to whether  certain property was wakf property. It was pointed  out that  if the legislature  had the intention to confer such power, there would have been a provision like s. S  of Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920. In Abdul Hussain v. Mohmmad Riza (supra) it was observed:           "Considering the  terms of  the enactment  and the      scope  and  purpose  of  the  Act  is  clear  that  the      legislature intended  of income  of wakf properties for      the purpose of providing some control on the management      of properties  which are  admittedly wakf. It could not      have intended  to include hl its scope the enquiry into      the vital  questions whether  the disputed  property is      wakf property  and the  person in possession of it is a      mutwalli, which  are questions of fundamental character      such as could be the subject-matter of a suit alone." Though sub-s.  (3) of  s. 4  of the  Act is rather unhappily worded, of the Wakf Act, 1954.      The Wakf  Act, 1954  does, in  our opinion,  furnish  a complete  machinery   for  the   better  administration  and supervision of  wakfs. Though  sub-s. (3) of s. 4 of the Act is rather  unhappily worded,  it is not a sound principle of construction to  interpret expressions  used in one Act with reference  to  their  use  in  another  Act,  and  decisions rendered with  reference to  construction of  one Act cannot apply with  reference to  the  provisions  of  another  Act, unless the two Acts are in pari materia. Further, when there is no ambiguity in the      (1) I.L.R. 52 All. 167.      (2) I.L.R. 57 All. 754.      (3) A.I.R. 1927 Pat. 189.      (4) I.L.R. 7 Luck. 601 (F.B.)      (5) A.I.R. 1938 Pat. 137.      (6) I.L.R. (1939) Nag. 564. 160 statute, it may not be permissible to refer to, for purposes of its  construction, any  previous legislation or decisions rendered therein.      The questions  that fall  for  determination  upon  the appeal are  two; first,  whether  a  Commissioner  of  Wakfs appointed under  sub-s. (1)  of s.  4 of the Wakf Act, 1954, has the  jurisdiction under  sub s.  (3) of  s. 4 to enquire whether a certain property is wakf property or not when such a dispute  raised by  a stranger  to the wakf and second, if so, whether the failure of such a person to institute a suit in a  civil court  of competent jurisdiction for decision of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 17  

such question  within a  period of one year, as provided for under sub-s.  (1) of  s. 6,  makes  the  inclusion  of  such property in  the list  of wakfs published by the Board under sub-s.(2) of s. 5 of the Act final and conclusive under sub- s. (4) of s. 6      It is  needless to stress that the whole purpose of the survey of  wakfs by  the Commissioner  of Wakfs under sub-s. (1) of  s. 4  is to  inform the  Board of  Wakfs, as  to the existence of  the existing  wakfs in  a State, in order that all such  wakfs should  be brought under the supervision and control of the Board of Wakfs.      While the  High  Court  was,  in  our  view,  right  in determining the  scope of  sub-s. (1) of s. 6 of the Act, it was clearly  in error  in cur tailing the ambit and scope of an enquiry  by the Commissioner of Wakfs under sub-s. (3) of s. 4 and that by the Board of Wakfs under s. 27 of the. Act      In  dealing   with  the   scope  of   enquiry  by   the Commissioner of  Wakfs: under  sub-s. (3)  of s. 4, the High Court adverts  to  the,.  heading  of  Chapter  II  and  the marginal note of sub-s. (1) of s. 4. It observes:           "The heading  of section 4 with which this chapter      started was  ’Preliminary survey  of wakfs’. The use of      the  word  ’Preliminary’  in  the  heading  is  one  of      significance. The weight  of authority  is in  favour of the view that the marginal note  upended to  a  section  cannot  be  used  for construing the  section. Lord Macnaghten in Balraj Kunwar v. Jagatpal Singh(1)  considered it  well settled that marginal notes  cannot   be  referred   to  for   the   purposes   of construction. This  Court after  referring to the above case with  approval,   said  in  Commissioner  of  Income-Tax  v. Ahmedbhai Umedbhai Umarbhai & Co.(2):           "Marginal notes in an Indian statute, as in an Act      of Parliament, cannot be referred to for the purpose of      construe the statute." (1) ILR 26 All. 393 (P.C.) (2) [1950]; S.C.R. 335. 161 As explained  by  Lord  Macnaghten  in  the  Privy  Council, marginal notes A are not part of an Act of Parliament.      The very  heading of Chapter II and the caption to s. 4 no  doubt   suggest  that  the  Commissioner  makes  only  a preliminary survey  regarding existing wakfs and the list of wakfs prepared  by him is published by the Board and neither the Commissioner  nor the  Board is  required  to  make  any enquiry regarding, the character of the property. That is to say, the  making of survey is only an administrative act and not a  quasi-judicial act.  But, on a closer examination, it is, clear  that while  making a survey of the existing wakfs in a  State under   sub-s.  (1) of 5. 4, the Commissioner is required by  sub-s. (3)  to submit  a report  to  the  State Government in  regard to  the serval  matters referred to in cls. (a)  to (f)  thereof. There may be a dispute as between the Board, the mutawalli or a person interested in the wakf, as regards  (a) the  existence of  a wakf,  i.e.  whether  a particular property  is wakf  property, (b)  whether it is a Shia wakf  or a  Sunni wakf,  (c)  extent  of  the  property attached to the wakf, (d) the nature and object of the wakf, etc. While  making such  an  enquiry,  the  Commissioner  is invested by  sub-s. (4)  with the  powers vested  in a civil court under  the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in respect of the summoning  and examining  of any  witness, requiring the discovery and production of any document, requisitioning any public record  from any court or office, issuing commissions for the  examination of  any witness or accounts, making any

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 17  

local inspection  or local  investigation etc.  In  view  of these comprehensive provisions, it is not disputed before us that the enquiry that the Commissioner makes for the purpose of submission of his report under sub-s. (3)? while making a survey of  existing wakfs in the Estate under sub-s. (1), is not purely  of an  administration nature  but partakes  of a quasi-judicial in  character,  in  respect  of  the  persons falling within the scope of sub-s. (1) of s. 6.      It would  be illogical  to hold  that  while  making  a survey  of   wakf  properties   existing  in   the  State  a Commissioner of  Wakfs appointed  by  the  State  Government under sub-s.  (1) of  s. 4,  should have no power to enquire whether a particular property is wakf property or not. If we may refer  to sub-s.  (1) of  s. 4,  so far  as material, it reads:           "The State  Government may, by notification in the      official Gazette,  appoint for the State a Commissioner      of Wakfs...  for the purpose of making a survey of wakf      properties existing  in the  State at  the date  of the      commencement of this Act." It will be clear that the words "for the purpose of making a survey of  wakf properties"  is a key to the construction of the section The 162 ordinary meaning  of the  word "survey",  as  given  in  the Random House  Dictionary of  English Language, is ’to take a general  or   comprehensive  view   of  or  appraise,  as  a situation’. If  the Commissioner  of Wakfs  has the power to make a  survey, it  is but  implicit that in the exercise of such power  he should  enquire whether  a wakf  exists.  The making o  such an  enquiry is a necessary concomitant of the power to  survey. The  High Court  was clearly  in error  in observing:           "Except  sub-section   (5)  there  is  nothing  in      section 4  or in  the rules  made by  the State to show      that the  Commissioner  is empowered to adjudicate on a      question, if  one arises, whether a particular property      is a wakf property or not."      We  are   of  the   opinion  that   the  power  of  the Commissioner to  survey wakf  properties under sub-s. (1) or to enquire  and investigate into the several matters set out in cls.  (e) to  (f) of  sub-s. (3)  cannot be  curtailed by taking recourse  to Sub-5.  (5). The  High Court  was wholly wrong in understanding the true implication of sub-s. (5) of s. 4.  It only  lays down  that if, during any such enquiry, any dispute arises as to whether a particular wakf is a Shia wakf or a Sunni wakf, and there are clear indications in the deed of  wakf as to its nature, the dispute shall be decided on the  basis of  such deed.  It, therefore,  makes the wakf deed conclusive  as to  the nature of the wakf, i.e. whether it is a Shia or a Sunni wakf. In our view, sub s.(5) of s. 4 cannot be  projected   into sub-s.  (1) for  determining the question whether  a certain  property is  a wakf property or not. Nor  does it enter into an enquiry as to several of the matters adverted into some of the clause of sub s. (3).      The matter  can also  be viewed  from another angle. If sections 4,  5 and  6 are  parts of an integrated scheme, as asserted, then  it follows as a necessary corollary that the enquiry envisaged  by sub-sections  (1) and (3) of s. 4 must cover the  field defined  by sub-s. (1) of s. 6. The opening words of the section are:           "If  any  question  arises  whether  a  particular      property specified  as wakf property in a list of wakfs      published under  sub section  (2) of  section 5 is wakf      property or  not or  whether a  wakf specified  in such

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 17  

    list is a Shia wakf or Sunni wakf .... " They clearly  envisage that  the enquiry by the Commissioner is not  con fined to the question as to whether a particular wakf is  Shia wakf or Sunni wakf. It may also embrace within itself a  dispute as  to whether  a wakf  exists. This  is a conduction which  sub-s. (1) of s.4 must, in its context and setting, bear.  Any other  construction would,  indeed, make the Act unworkable. 163      While it  is true  that under  the  guise  of  judicial interpretation the  court cannot supply casus omissus, it is equally true  that  the  courts  in  construing  an  Act  of Parliament must  always try  to give effect to the intention of the  legislature. In  Crawford v. Spooner(1) the Judicial Committee said:           "We  cannot   aid  the   legislature’s   defective      phrasing of  an Act,  we cannot  add and  mend, and, by      construction,  make  up  deficiencies  which  are  left      there." To do  so would be to usurp the function of the legislation. At the  same time, it is well settled that in construing the provisions of a statute the course should be slow to adopt a construction which  tends to  make any  part of  the statute meaningless or  ineffective. Thus, an attempt must always be made to  reconcile the  relevant provisions so as to advance the remedy intended by the statute.      It would  certainly have been better if the legislature had inserted  a provision  like section  6-C incorporated in the Mussalman  Wakf Act,  1923 by the Mussalman Wakf (Bombay Amendment) Act,  1935, which  was in  force in the States of Maharashtra and Gujarat, namely:           "6-C. Power of the Court to enquire: (1) The court      may, either  on its  own motion or upon the application      of any  person claiming  to have an interest in a wakf,      hold an  enquiry in  the prescribed manner act any time      to ascertain-           (i) whether a wakf exists." Failure to  insert such  a provision  in sub.  (3) of  s. 4, however, is of little consequence. As already indicated, the power of  the Commissioner to make a survey of existing wakf properties, carries,  with it, by necessary implication, the power to enquire as to the existence of a wakf. Perhaps, the legislature thought it to be a superfluity.      That leaves  us with  the question  as to  the scope of sub-s. (1)  of s.  6. All  that we  have to consider in this appeal  is,   whether  if  the  Commissioner  of  Wakfs  had jurisdiction  to   adjudicate   and   decide   against   the respondents Nos.  l and  2 that  the property in dispute was wakf property,  the list  of wakfs published by the Board of Wakfs under sub-s. (2) of 5. 5 would be final and conclusive against them under s. 6(4) in case they had not filed a suit within a year from the publication of the lists The question as  to   whether  the  respondents  Nos.  1  and  2  can  be dispossessed, or  their possession  can be threatened by the Board of  Wakfs by  proceeding under s. 36B without filing a suit in  a civil  court of  competent jurisdiction  does not arise for our consideration      (1) [1846] 6 Moors P.C. 1. 164      In the  present case,  the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who are non  Muslims, contended  that they are outside the scope of sub-s.  (1) of s. 6, and consequently, they have no right to file  the suit  contemplated  by  that  sub-section  and, therefore, the list of wakfs published by the Board of Wakfs under sub-s.  (2) of  S!. 5  cannot be  final and conclusive

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 17  

against them  under sub-s.  (4) of  s. 6,  it was urged that respondents Nos,. 1 and 2 were wholly outside the purview of sub-s. (1)  of s.  6 and  they must,  therefore, necessarily fall outside  the scope  of the  enquiry envisaged by sub-s. (1) of  s. 4,  as the provisions contained’ in sections 4, 5 and 6  form part  of an integrated scheme. The question that arises for  consideration, therefore,  is as  to who are the parties that  could be taken to be concerned in a proceeding under sub-s.  (1) of  s. 6  of the Act, and whether the list published under subs. (2) of s. S declaring certain property to be  wakf property,  would bind  a person who is neither a mutawalli nor a person interested in the wakf.      The answer  to these  questions must  turn on  the true meaning and  construction of  the  word  ’therein’  in  the, expression ’any  person interest  ted therein’  appearing in sub-s. (1)  of s.  6. In  order to understand the meaning of the word  ’therein’ in our view, it is necessary to refer to the preceding  words ’the  Board or  the  mutawalli  of  the wakf’. The  word ’therein’  must necessarily  refer  to  the ’wakf’ which  immediately pre  cedes it.  It cannot refer to the ’wakf  property’. Sub-section (1) of s. 6 enumerates the persons who can file suits and also the questions in respect of which such suits can be filed. In enumerating the persons who are  empowered to  file suits under this provision, only the Board,  the mutawalli  of  the  wakf,  and  ’any  person interested therein’,  thereby necessarily meaning any person interested in  the wakf,  are listed.  It should be borne in mind that the Act deals with wakfs, its institutions and its properties. It  would, therefore., be logical and reasonable to infer  that its  provisions empower  only those  who  are interested in the wakfs to institute suits.      In dealing with the question, the High Court observes:           "In our  opinion, the words "any person interested      therein" appearing in sub-section (1) of section 6 mean      no more  than a  person interested in a wakf as defined      in clause (h) of section 3 of the Act           It is urged by learned counsel for the petitioners      that the  legislature has  not used in section 6(1) the      words "any person interested in a wakf" and, therefore,      this meaning  should not  be given  to the  words  "any      person  interested   therein".  This  argument  is  not      tenable because the words "any person inte- 165      rested therein" appear soon after "the mutawalli of the      wakf" A  and therefore the word ’therein’ has been used      to avoid re petition of the words "in the wakf" and not      to extend  the scope of the section to persons who fall      outside the  scope of  the words  "person interested in      the wakf".  The purpose  of section 6 is to confine the      dispute between  the wakf  Board, the  mutawalli and  a      person interested in the wakf." That, in our opinion, is the right construction.      We are  fortified in  That view by the decision of this Court in  Sirajul Hag Khan & ors. v. The Sunni Central Board of Wakf,  U.P. &  ors While construing s. 5(2) of the United Provinces Muslins Wakf Act, 1936, this Court interpreted the expression "any person interested in a wakf" as meaning ’any person interested in what is held to be a wakf’, that is, in the dedication  of a  property for  a  pious,  religious  or charitable purpose. It will be noticed that sub-s. (1) of s. 6 of  the Act  is based  in sub-s. (2) of s. 5 of the United Provinces Muslims Wakf Act, 1936, which runs thus:           "The mutawalli  of a wakf or any person interested      in a  wakf or  a Central  Board may  bring a  suit in a      civil court of competent jurisdiction for a declaration

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 17  

    that any  transaction held by the Commissioner of Wakfs      to be  a wakf is not a wakf, or any transaction held or      assumed by him not to be a wakf, or that a wakf held by      him to  pertain to  a particular sect does not be- long      to that  sect,  or  that  any  wakf  reported  by  such      Commissioner as being subject to the provisions of this      Act is  exempted under section 2, or that any wakf held      by him to be so exempted is subject to this Act."      The provision  to that section prescribed the period of one year’s  limitation, as here, to a suit by a mutawalli or a person interested in the wakf.      The two  provisions are  practically similar in content except that  the language of the main enacting part has been altered in  sub-s. (1) of s. 6 of the present Act and put in a proper  form. In  redrafting the section, the sequence, of the different  clauses has  been changed, therefore, for the expression "any person interested in a wakf" the legislature had to  use the  expression "any person interested therein". The word  ’therein’ appearing  in sub-s.  (1) of  s. 6 must, therefore, mean  ’any  person  interested  in  a  waker’  as defined in  s. 3(h).  The object  of sub-s. (1) of s 6 is to narrow down  the dispute  between the  Board of  Wakfs,  the mutawalli and  the person interested in the wakf, as defined in s. 3 (h) (1) [1959] S.C.R. 1287. 166      In this  context, the scope of s. 6 was examined by the High Court and it observed:           "The purpose  of sec.  6 is to confine the dispute      between the  Wakf Board,  the mutawalli  and  a  person      interested in  the wakf.  In other words, if there is a      dispute  whether   a  particular  property  is  a  wakf      property or  not, or whether a wakf is a Shia wakf or a      Sunni wakf, then the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf      or a person interested in the wakf as defined in sec. 3      may institute  suit  in  a  civil  court  of  competent      jurisdiction for the decision of the question. They can      file such  a suit  within one  year of  the date of the      publication of the list of wakfs and if no such suit is      filed, the  list would  be final and conclusive between      them.           The very  object of the Wakf Act is to provide for      better administration  and supervision of wakfs and the      Board has been given powers of superintendence over all      wakfs which  vest in the Board. This provision seems to      have been  made  in  order  to  avoid  prolongation  of      triangular  disputes   between  the   Wakf  Board,  the      mutawalli and a person interested in the wakf who would      be a  person of the same community. It could never have      been the  intention of  the legislature to cast a cloud      on the  right, title or interest of persons who are not      Muslims. That is, if a person who is non-Muslim whether      he be  a Christian,  a Hindu, a Sikh, a Parsi or of any      other  re   ligneous  denomination  and  if  he  is  in      possession of  a certain  property his right, title and      interest cannot  be put in jeopardy simply because that      property is  included in  the list  published under sub      sec. (2) of Sec. 5.           The Legislature  could  not  have  meant  that  he      should be  driven to  file a  suit in a Civil Court for      declaration of his title simply because the property in      his possession is included in the list. Singularly, the      legislature could  not have meant to curtail the period      of limitation available to him under the Limitation Act      and to  provide that  he must file a suit within a year

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 17  

    or the  list would be final and conclusive against him.      In our  opinion, sub-section  (4) makes  the list final      and  conclusive   only  between  the  Wakf  Board,  the      mutawalli and  the person  interested in  the  wakf  as      defined in Section 3 and to no other person."      We are  in agreement  with this  reasoning of  the High Court.      It follows  that where  a stranger  who is a non-Muslim and is  in possession of a certain property his right, title and interest therein cannot be 167 put in  jeopardy merely  because the property is included in the List.  Such  a person is not required to file a suit for a declaration  of his title within a period of one year. The special rule  of limitation  laid down  in proviso to sub s. (1) of  s. 6  is not  applicable to him. In other words, the list published  by the Board of Wakfs under sub-s. (2) of s. S scan be challenged by him by filing a suit for declaration of title even after the expiry of the period of one year, if the necessity of filing such suit arises.      Incidentally, the  High Court  also dealt with s. 27 of the Act, and observed.           "S. 27  does not  seem to suggest that it empowers      the Board  to decide  the question whether a particular      property is  wakf property  or not,  if that  challenge      comes from  a stranger  who is  neither mutawalli nor a      person interested  in the  wakf,  but  who  belongs  to      another religious  denomination and  who claims a valid      title and  lawful possession  over that property. To ac      kept the respondents argument would mean that the Board      would be  given the powers of the Civil Court to decide      such disputes  between itself and strangers and thus to      make the Board’s decision final unless it is changed by      a Civil  Court of  competent jurisdiction. If a dispute      is raised  by a  non Muslim, the Board cannot by simply      entering the  property in  the register  of wakfs drive      him to take recourse to a Civil Court      In our judgment, the High Court was clearly in error in dealing with s. 27 or s. 36B of the Act. It appears from the writ petition  field the  High Court  that no  relief was as sought  in   respect  of   any  action   under  s.  27.  The observations of the High Court were, therefore, strictly not called for  in regard  to s.  27. It  should have  left  the question open.  The question  may arise  if and when, action under s. 27 is taken. We, therefore, refrain from expressing any opinion as to the scope of s. 27 of the Act.      Likewise, the High Court went on to consider the impact of s. 36B, and observed:           "In our  opinion, this section cannot apply in the      case of  a property which is in the hands of a stranger      over whom  the Board  has no  control  under  the  Act,      simply because  the Board happens to enter the property      in its  register. In a case like the present one, where      the  petitioners   claim  their   possession  over  the      property as  mortgagees from  the year  1944  and  fur-      their claim  their title and possession as vendees over      the same  property from  the year  1954, the  Board  of      Wakfs cannot, by 168      simply entering  the property  in the  list of wakfs or      registering it  in the register of wakfs, drive them to      file a  suit to  establish their  title or retain their      possession. It cannot also seek to dispossess them from      the property by resorting to section 36B. It is for the      Board to  file a  civil suit for a declaration that the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 17  

    property in  dispute is  a wakf  property and to obtain      its possession."      It was  really not  necessary for  the  High  Court  to decide whether  s. 36B  of the  Act was attracted or not, in the facts and circumstances of the case.      We must accordingly held that the Commissioner of Wakfs acted within  jurisdiction in  holding the disputed property to be  wakf property.  It must,  therefore, follow  that the Board of  Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan was justified in including the property in the list of wakfs published under sub-s. (2) of s.  S of the Act. We must also hold, on a construction of sub-s. (1)  of s.  6 that  the list of wakfs so published by the Board was not final and conclusive under sub s (4) of s. 6 against  the respondents Nos. l and 2 due to their failure to bring  a suit  within one  year as contemplated by sub s. (1) of s. 6.      In view  of the foregoing, the right of the respondents Nos. 1  and 2 in respect of the disputed property, if at all they have  any,  will  remain  unaffected  by  the  impugned notification. They  are at  liberty to  bring a suit for the establishment of  their right  and title,  if  any,  to  the property.      Accordingly, the  order of  the High Court allowing the writ petition  and  declaring  that  the  inclusion  of  the property in  dispute in  the list  of wakf  published by the Board bf Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan under sub-s. (2) of s. 5 of the Wakf Act, 1954 was not binding on the respondents Nos. 1 and 2  is upheld,  but its  direct restraining  the Board of Muslim Wakfs  from entering  the disputed  property  in  the register of  wakfs and  from dispossessing  the  respondents Nos. 1  and 2,  except by  way of a suit in a civil court of competent jurisdiction  is set  aside as  it proceeds on the assumption that  sections 27  and 36B  of the  Act  are  not applicable,  which   question  did   not   arise   for   its consideration. The  parties are  left to  take  recourse  to their remedies  according to  law, with  advertence  to  the observations made above,      Subject to  this modification,  the appeal fails and is dismissed. There shall he no order as to costs. P.B.R.                                     Appeal Dismissed. 169