Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Mohammed Ajmal vs Chief Executive Officer Karnataka State Board And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|30 January, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.61485/2016 (GM-WAKF) BETWEEN:
SRI. MOHAMMED AJMAL AGED 40 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED SAMIULLA SECRETARY (PROPOSED MANAGING COMMITTEE) MASJID SABA & MADRASA –E-MOHAMMEDIA FAIZUL-ULOOM, CHAMUNDINAGAR R.T.NAGAR POST BENGALURU – 560 032. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.PRAVEEN KUMAR.K.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS CONSTITUTED BY THE GOVT OF KARNATAKA UNDER THE WAKF ACT 1995 (CENTRAL ACT-43 OF 95) “DARUL AUQAF’’ NO-6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU – 560 052.
2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF AUQAF/ “DARUL AUQAF’’ NO-6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU – 560 052.
3. THE WAKF OFFICER (URBAN) DISTRICT WAKF (ADVISORY) COMMITTEE OFFICE OF DISTRICT WAKF OFFICE BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT NO.16, 2ND FLOOR HAMEED SHAH AND HAZ MUHIB SHAH COMPLEX, CUBBONPET BENGALURU – 560 002.
4. MR.K.MAHABOOB SAB S/O LATE KHASIM SAB AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS (PROSED PRESIDENT AS PER IMPUGNED ORDER) PROPOSED MANAGING COMMITTEE MASJID SABA & MADRASA-E MOHAMMEDIA FAIZUL-ULOOM, CHAMUNDINAGAR R.T. NAGAR POST BENGALURU – 560 032. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S Z A KHURESHI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY KARNATAKA WAKF TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.1/2016 DATED 24.11.2016 AT ANNEXURE-A AND TO HOLD THAT THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT BOARD IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONSTITUTING COMMITTEE THROUGH ORDER DATED 19.12.2015 AT ANNEXURE-B.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 30.01.2017.
2. In terms of the memo, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition, if the need arises in future.
Registry is directed to return the papers, if any sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sd/- JUDGE ST
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Mohammed Ajmal vs Chief Executive Officer Karnataka State Board And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
30 January, 2017
Judges
  • A S Bopanna