WAQF BOARD, RAJASTHAN versus JINDAL SAW LIMITED & ORS

Citation: [2022] 5 S.C.R. 803 · Decided: 29-04-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HEMANT GUPTA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
803
[2022] 5 S.C.R. 803
803
WAQF BOARD, RAJASTHAN
v.
JINDAL SAW LIMITED & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 2788 of 2022)
APRIL 29, 2022
[HEMANT GUPTA AND V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.]
Religious structure: Waqf property – Respondent no.1 was
granted lease of an area in Survey no.6731 for the purpose of
mining activities – Writ petition filed by respondent no.1 seeking
direction to the Wakf Board-appellant and other respondents not to
interfere with the action of respondent no.1 in removing a structure
forming part of Khasra No. 6731 at Village Pur – Plea of Waqf
Board that there is a religious structure on the land comprising in
Survey No. 6731 – High Court allowed writ petition – Appeal by
Wakf Board – Held: The Qalandari Masjid on Tiranga Hill as per
the document produced by the Waqf Board is located on Survey No.
931 – There is no assertion that the Survey No. 931 is changed as
Survey No. 6731 – Therefore, the claim of the Waqf Board is on a
different portion of land and not the land leased to respondent no.1
– There is also discrepancy in the total area of the Masjid in the
documents produced – Moreover, there is no evidence to prove that
the structure was being used as a mosque and termed as Waqf – In
the absence of any proof of dedication or user, a dilapidated wall
or a platform cannot be conferred a status of a religious place – No
interference with the decision of High Court.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The Qalandari Masjid on Tiranga Hill as per the
document produced by the appellant is located on Survey No.
931. There is no assertion that the Survey No. 931 is changed as
Survey No. 6731. In fact, the old number of Survey No. 6731 is
9646 or may be some other number but positively not the survey
number 931. Therefore, the claim of the appellant is on a different
portion of land and not the land leased to the writ petitioner. There
is discrepancy in the total area of the Masjid in the two documents,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
804
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 5 S.C.R.
i.e., the extract produced by the appellant from the register and
the second survey report. The letter dated 17.4.2012 by the
Anjuman Committee is based upon hearsay and is not of any
binding value. [Para 16][810-E-G]
2. Still further, there is no evidence at any given point of
time that the structure was being used as a mosque. There is no
allegation or proof of either of dedication or user or grant which
can be termed as a waqf within the meaning of the Act. The report
of the experts is relevant only to the extent that the structure
has no archaeological or historical importance. In the absence of
any proof of dedication or user, a dilapidated wall or a platform
cannot be conferred a status of a religious place for the purpose
of offering prayers/Namaaz. [Paras 17, 18][810-G; 811-A, C-D]
3. The stand of the State Government that they have
identified it to be a religious structure comprising in Khasra No.
6731 has not been produced on record. There is nothing on record
that such decision if any, was arrived at after associating the writ
petitioner. It is always open to the State as lessor to exercise the
powers conferred in it by the lease deed after complying the
principles of natural justice and on good and sufficient grounds.
[Para 19][811-E]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2788
of 2022.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.09.2021 of the High Court
of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jodhpur in D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.8848 of 2020.
With
Civil Appeal No. 2789 of 2022.
C. S. Vaidyanathan, Ranjit Kumar, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Advs.,
Prashant Bhushan, Devesh Agnihotri, Khushi Mohd., Anjum Parvez,
Ms. Nilofar Khan, Anurag Abhishek, Abhishek Singh, Nilaya
Bandhopadhyay, Arpit Prakash, Sandeep Kumar Jha, Abdul Qadir Abbasi,
Advs. for the Appellant.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
805
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
1. The challenge in the present appeals is to an order dated
29.9.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at
Jodhpur, whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No. 11 was allowed
directing the appellant and respondent Nos. 2 to 8 not to interfere with
the action of the writ petitioner in removal of the structure forming part
of Khasra No. 6731 at Village Pur, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
2. The writ petitioner was granted lease of an area
admeasuring1556.7817 hectares vide lease deed dated 8.12.2010 for
the mining of Gold, Silver, Lead, Zinc, Copper, Iron, Cobalt, Nickle and
associated 

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