AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Nirzar S. Desai, J
By way of this application for extension of time, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs :-
"B. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to extend the period for further 9 months from the date of appointment of the New Board and Chairman of the Board to take a decision as directed by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.09.2022; (Annexure 'A')"
It is stated in the application by the applicant that though on 14.9.2022, the State had notified appointment of new Board members as per Section 14 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and thereafter, election of Chairman was also notified on 1.10.2022. However, in the meantime, in one Public Interest Litigation No.75 of 2018 which was pending before this Court, a statement was made by the State that they will not act on the 10.10.2022 for appointment of Chairman of the Board. Thereafter, vide Notification dated 31.1.2023, appointment of new as well as old Board was dissolved by the State Government and as on today, there is no Wakf Board functioning as stated in the affidavit on oath.
In view of that, the applicant - Wakf Board has prayed that though this Court vide order dated 14.9.2022 directed to decide application preferred by respondent No.2 as early as possible, preferably within a period of 9 months from the date of receipt of the order, in absence of Wakf Board, further extension of 9 months is prayed for.
I have heard Mr. M.S. Shah, learned advocate appearing for applicant - Wakf Board, learned advocate Mr. Nilay Thaker for Tattvam K. Patel for respondent No.2 and leaned advocate Ms. Margi Patel for Mr. Satyam Chhaya for respondent No.1.
Considering the aforesaid facts, it is submitted by learned advocate appearing for respondents that though they are in hurry to see that the matter is decided at the earliest, however, considering the facts narrated in the application, they do not have any objection if extension of time as prayed for is granted. However, learned advocate appearing for the respondents states that if the application remains undecided even after further period of 9 months that the Court may extend, the respondents may be permitted to approach this Court once again directly for redressal
Considering the fact that the request made by the respondents does not seem to be unreasonable as during this period of 9 months, no appointment is made in the Wakf Board and, therefore, despite the direction issued by this Court, the application preferred by the respondent No.2 has remained undecided. In view of that, further time of 9 months from today is granted to the applicant to decide the application preferred by the respondent No.2. However, in case, if the Wakf Board on any reason including the reason of non-appointment Wakf Board Members fails to decide the application of the respondents within a period of further 9 months, the respondents are at liberty to approach this Court directly.
With the aforesaid direction, present application stands disposed of.