U.P SHIA CENTRAL BOARD OF W AKF AND ORS. versus U.P. SUNNI CENTRAL BOARD OF WAKF AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] 3 S.C.R. 336 · Decided: 01-05-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
U .P. SHIA CENTRAL BOARD OF W AKF AND ORS. 
v. 
U.P. SUNNI CENTRAL BOARD OF WAKF AND ORS. 
MAY 1, 2001 
B 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND D.P. MQHAPTRA, JJ.] 
Uttar Pradesh Muslim Wakfs Act, 1960-Section 8(1)-Registration of 
mosque by appellant as Shi a Wakf property-Suit by respondents against the 
.f-
. registration and for declaration as Sunni Wakf property under the Act-
C Reference under the Act-Maintainability of-Held, maintainable as the Act 
covers all disputes relating to Wakf and its pr,operties. 
Section 29(8)-Limitation-Held, filing of application within 90 days 
of knowledge of registration, where no notice given is valid. 
D 
Appellant Shia \Yakf Board registered a mosque and its Schan and 
Imam Chowk as Shia Wakf property. Respondent Sunni Wakf Board filed a 
suit before the Tribunal questioning the registration and for a declaration 
of the suit property to be Sunni Wakf property and to restrain the appellants 
from interfering with the possession, administration, management and control 
E over the property. The Tribunal partly allowed the claim of the respondents. 
The registration of the mosque along with its Schan by the Shia Wakf Board 
was declared to be null and void. In respect of the Imam Chowk and its Schan, 
the registration was held to be valid. The appellants as also the respondents 
filed appeals before High Court against the judgment of the Tribunal. Tile 
High Court dismissed the appeal of the appellants and allowed the appeal of 
F the respondents and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh trial 
in the light of the observations made in the judgment. 
In appeal to this Court, the appellants contended that the dispute whether 
the mosque, its Schan and the Imam Chowk were the properties of the Sunni 
sect or the Shia sect does not come within the purview of section 29(8) of 
G the Uttar Pradesh Muslim Wakfs Act, 1960; that in the absence of any 
notification by the Commissioner under section 6(4) of the Act, a reference 
under section 8(1) of the Act is not maintainable; that the dispute is barred 
by limitation under the proviso to section 8(1) of the Act. 
H 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
336 
> 
U.P. SHIACEN.BOARDOFWAKFv. U.P. SUNNICEN.BOARDOFWAKF 
337 
HELD : 1.1. From the provisions laid down in Uttar Pradesh Muslim A 
Wakfs Act, 1960, the scheme of the statute is that in case of ay dispute, . 
whether a particular property is Wakf property or not or whether a Wakf 
is a Shia Wakf or Sunni Wakf, the Board concerned or the mutawalli of the 
Wakf or any person interested in the Wakf may in accordance with fl1e 
provisions of the law ref er the dispute for adjudication to the Tribunal. On 
a plain reading of the relevant provisions of the Act, it is expressed in wide ' B 
terms taking within its fold different types of disputes relating to a Wakf 
and its properties. The statute enables different classes of persons the 
interested in the Wakf and its properties like the Board concerned, mutawalli 
and any person interested in the Wakf to raise a dispute. The section does, 
not make any provision that the publication of a list of Wakf by the C 
Commissioner under section 6 of the Act is a sine qua non for a reference 
under section 8(1) of the Act. All that is laid down in the proviso to sub-
section (1) of the Act is that after a list of Wakfs has been published by the 
Commissioner, a dispute as contemplated in the proviso has to be raised 
within one year from the date of the publication of the list of Wakfs and not 
thereafter. In the present case, no list of Wakfs has been published by the D 
Commissioner under section 6(4) of the Act. Therefore, the limitation 
prescribed in the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 8 has no application 
in the Ca!!_e. In the cL cumstances, the contentions raised by the appellants 
against maintainability of the reference made to the Tribunal under section 
8(1) of the Act on the ground that such a reference does not lie in the E 
absence of a publication of the list of Wakfs by the Commissioner or that 
the reference is barred by limitation cannot be accepted. 
(342-D.-H; 343-A-C] 
1.2. Sub-section (8) of section 29 of the Act vests an independent right 
in a person aggrieved by an order of the Board under sub-section (7) to make F 
an application to refer the dispute to the Tribunal. Such application is to be 
made within 90 days from the date of the order by which the applicant feels 
aggrieved. The respondents came to know aboot t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.