AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Miss Rafat Farooqui, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri Qamar Hasan, Rizvi, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
Simply, put the case of the petitioner is that she was kirayedar of the wakf in question. By the order of the controller dated 04.11.1995, petitioner was declared to be unauthorized occupant and requisition was sent by the controller to the collector to get possession of the wakf property and deliver it to the Board. The petitioner says that no opportunity of hearing was ever given to him and no notice was ever served upon him. The petitioner has annexed a receipt of tenancy. However, there is no letter showing that she was allowed to enter into the premise. In any view of the matter, the order of the controller does not show that any opportunity was ever given or that the notice was ever served upon the petitioner. The order is thus vitiated for want of violation of principals of natural justice. The order is accordingly set aside, the matter is remanded back to the controller.
At this juncture, Shri Qamar Hasan has informed that during the pendency of this writ petition, new act has come up in place of the old Act of 1960. Under the new Wakf Act of 1995 provision of the earlier of Section 57 has been more or less replaced. Under this Act the Chief Executive Officer has been appointed. Controller has been replaced by Board and under Section 54 of the new Act, it is the Chief Executive Officer, who has to look into the complaints of any encroachment. Further he has to satisfy himself after enquiry and if there is any encroachment, he has to apply to the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall pass order of eviction, which shall be carried out by the Executive Magistrate. In view of the same let the matter be re-examined by the Chief Executive Officer in the light of new Wakf Act. Appropriate opportunity should be given to the petitioner and procedure shall followed in accordance with law. Writ petition is allowed.