LATIF S/O. JABBAR HUSSAIN PEERZADE vs THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

- 1 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD

TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

WRIT PETITION NO. 105744 OF 2014 (GM-WAKF)

BETWEEN:

1. LATIF
S/O. JABBAR HUSSAIN PEERZADE
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. HOUSE NO. 1, 1067,
GANDHINAGAR, HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM-591 309.
…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. B.S. KAMATE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
KARNATAKA WAKF BOARD
DARUL A WAKF NO.6
CUNNINGHAM ROAD
BANGALORE-560 052.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BELGAUM, DIST: BELGAUM-590 001.

3. THE TAHASHILDAR
HUKKERI, DIST: BELGAUM-590 001.

4. THE CHAIRMAN/ PRESIDENT
HAZARAT SAYED PEERZADE
KALAMI DARGAH, HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM-591 309.

5. WAKF OFFICER AND CARE TAKER
DISTRICT WAKF ADVISORY COMMITTEE
















Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 2 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


CHIKODI-591 201.
REP. BY SRI SHABBIR RAJESAB JAMADAR
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. D.L. LADKHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. AGA FOR R2 AND R3;
SRI. HARSHAWARDHAN M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 23.04.2014 PASSED
BY THE V ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND WAKF
TRIBUNAL, BELGAUM, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-Q AND THE
ORDER DATED 12.01.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2nd RESPONDENT
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H AND ORDER OF REQUISITION
DATED 02.09.2011, ISSUED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT, VIDE
ANNEXURE-G; AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 08.10.2026, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

CAV JUDGMENT

The captioned writ petition is filed by the petitioner
seeking to quash the judgment dated 23.04.2014 passed
by the Wakf Tribunal, produced at Annexure-Q, the order
dated 12.01.2014 passed by respondent No.2, produced at
Annexure-H, and the requisition dated 02.09.2011 issued
by respondent No.1, produced at Annexure-G.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 3 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


2. Facts leading to the case are as under:
The controversy in the present writ petition revolves
around the status and character of the land bearing
Sy.No.38A/5A measuring 1 acre 6 guntas. The case of the
petitioner is that the aforesaid land was originally an inam
land and, pursuant to abolition of the inam, the same
came to be vested in the State Government. It is the
specific case of the petitioner that thereafter the land was
re-granted in favour of one Babasab Miyasaheb Peerzade
under the order dated 07.02.1962. Pursuant thereto,
mutation entry was effected in ME No.6893. The land was
thereafter converted into ordinary ryotwari land pursuant
to the order dated 01.06.1967.
3. After the demise of Babasab Miyasaheb
Peerzade, the name of his son, Hussainsab, came to be
entered in the revenue records. Hussainsab thereafter
conveyed the property in favour of the petitioner under a
registered sale deed, a copy thereof is produced at
Annexure-C. Pursuant to the registered sale deed, the
petitioner’s name came to be entered in the CTS records.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 4 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


The petitioner asserts that he has been in lawful
possession and enjoyment of the property and was also
permitted to operate a tea stall in the subject property.
4. While matters stood thus, respondent No.1
issued a requisition dated 02.09.2011, on the basis of
which respondent No.2 proceeded to pass an order dated
12.01.2014 directing respondent No.3 to take possession
of the subject property and hand over the same to
respondent No.4.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said
order was passed without issuing notice to him and
without holding any enquiry into the title and nature of the
property. According to the petitioner, the entire action was
founded merely on the requisition dated 02.09.2011 and
there was no independent adjudication as to whether the
subject property was, in fact, Wakf property.
6. The petitioner, aggrieved by the said
proceedings, preferred an appeal under Section 52(4) of
the Wakf Act, 1995. The respondents entered appearance
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 5 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


and filed their statement of objections. Before the
Tribunal, the petitioner specifically contended that the
records relied upon by the respondents themselves
disclosed that the subject property had been inserted
subsequently in the alleged record of public trust and that
the property did not find place in the relevant list of Wakf
properties. It was further contended that the original title
of Babasab was traceable to the re-grant made after the
land had vested in the State and, therefore, the property
could not subsequently be treated as Wakf property
merely on the basis of an entry or notification.
7. The learned Wakf Tribunal, however, rejected
the petitioner’s challenge.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would contend that the entire foundation of the
proceedings initiated by the Wakf authorities is erroneous.
He would submit that the documents produced by the
petitioner clearly establish that the subject land was an
inam land; that the same vested in the State pursuant to
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 6 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


the abolition of inams; that it was subsequently re-granted
in favour of Babasab; and that the rights flowing from
such re-grant were thereafter inherited and ultimately
conveyed to the petitioner under a registered sale deed.
9. It is argued that once the land stood vested in
the State, the subsequent claim of the Wakf Board that
the very same property constituted Wakf property cannot
be sustained unless the Board establishes a valid source of
title or dedication. According to learned counsel, a mere
entry in the records or a Gazette notification cannot, by
itself, nullify the statutory consequences flowing from the
abolition of the inam.
10. Reliance is placed on the judgments of the Co-
ordinate Bench in Sri Babuchandkote v. The State of
1
Karnataka and Karnataka State Board of Wakfs v.
2
The Land Tribunal . Reliance is also placed on the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Salem Muslim
Burial Ground Protection Committee v. State of

1
W.P.No.204748 of 2016 Dtd: 17.02.2020
2
W.P.No.26096 of 2012 Dtd: 15.07.2025
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 7 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


3
Tamil Nadu , particularly on the requirement of a proper
survey and enquiry before a property can be included in
the statutory list of Wakf properties.
11. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
Wakf authorities would contend that the subject property
belonged to the Wakf and that Babasab was only
functioning as a trustee or Mutawalli. It is argued that,
upon his demise, his son could not have acquired any
proprietary right in the property and, consequently, could
not have conveyed any valid title in favour of the
petitioner. The respondents would therefore contend that
the registered sale deed relied upon by the petitioner
cannot defeat the rights of the Wakf.
12. In the light of the rival submissions and the
material on record, the following points arise for
consideration:
(i) Whether the respondents have
established that the land bearing Sy.No.38A/5
measuring 1 acre 6 guntas was Wakf property

3
(2023) 16 SCC 264
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 8 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


notwithstanding the admitted historical record
showing its character as an inam land and its
subsequent vesting and re-grant?
(ii) Whether, after the land stood vested in
the State under the applicable inam abolition law
and was thereafter re-granted in favour of
Babasab Miyasaheb Peerzade, the Wakf
authorities could claim the same property merely
on the basis of a subsequent Wakf
entry/notification without establishing a valid
source of Wakf title?
(iii) Whether the order dated 12.01.2014 and
the consequential judgment of the Wakf Tribunal
are vitiated for want of proper enquiry and
violation of the principles of natural justice?
(iv) Whether the impugned orders call for
interference in exercise of the jurisdiction of this
Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India?
Findings on Point Nos.(i) to (iv):
13. These two points are interconnected and are
therefore taken up together.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 9 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


14. The foundational question which the authorities
were required to determine was not merely whether the
name of the subject property finds place in any Wakf
record, but how the property acquired the character of
Wakf property in the first place.
15. The documents relied upon by the petitioner
trace the origin of the property to an inam tenure. The
material placed before this Court indicates that the land
was subjected to the statutory process of abolition of
inams, resulting in vesting in the State. Thereafter, under
order dated 07.02.1962, the property came to be re-
granted in favour of Babasab Miyasaheb Peerzade and
mutation was effected in ME No.6893. The subsequent
order dated 01.06.1967 further assumes significance,
since the land was converted into ordinary ryotwari
tenure.
16. Thus, the title pleaded by the petitioner does
not commence with the sale deed executed in his favour.
The registered sale deed is only the culmination of a chain
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 10 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


of title which, according to the material on record,
commences with statutory vesting and subsequent re-
grant.
17. In such circumstances, the burden was upon
the Wakf authorities to demonstrate that, notwithstanding
the statutory vesting and re-grant, the subject property
continued to retain the character of Wakf property. That
burden could not have been discharged merely by relying
upon an entry in a Wakf record, particularly when the
petitioner had produced documents demonstrating a
different and legally traceable origin of title.
Effect of statutory vesting:
18. The significance of statutory vesting cannot be
overlooked. Once an inam is abolished and the land vests
in the State in accordance with the applicable abolition
statute, the previous incidents attached to the inam stand
governed by the statutory scheme. The subsequent rights
of the original holder or claimant are those which flow
from the re-grant or grant contemplated under the
abolition legislation.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 11 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


19. The question, therefore, is not whether a
person described as a trustee could alienate Wakf
property. That proposition would undoubtedly operate
where the property is first established to be Wakf
property. The anterior question is whether the subject land
was, in fact, Wakf property at the relevant point of time.
20. The respondents cannot answer this
foundational question merely by asserting that Babasab
was a trustee. Such an assertion requires evidentiary
foundation. If the original tenure was a service inam or
other inam which stood abolished by statute and the land
thereafter vested in the State and was re-granted to an
individual, the Wakf authorities must establish by cogent
material that the land was independently dedicated to
Wakf or that, notwithstanding the statutory vesting, the
property continued to retain a legally sustainable Wakf
character.
21. The distinction between a property originally
endowed to a Wakf institution and a property which was
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 12 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


held by an individual as an inam/service holder is material.
The mere fact that the individual was associated with a
religious institution or that the property was historically
connected with a religious establishment does not, by
itself, answer the question of title.
22. The aforesaid principle receives considerable
support from the judgment of this Court in Karnataka
State Board of Wakfs v. The Land Tribunal (supra). In
that case, the Court considered the effect of statutory
vesting under the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous)
Inams Abolition Act, 1954 vis-à-vis a subsequent Wakf
notification. The Court held, in substance, that statutory
vesting under the abolition enactment cannot be nullified
merely because the property was subsequently shown in a
Wakf notification. The Court also recognised the distinction
between an inam granted to an individual for service and a
grant made directly to a Wakf institution.
23. Significantly, this Court held that where the
land is covered by the statutory scheme of inam abolition
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 13 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


and the rights claimed by the private party arise from that
statutory framework, the Wakf Board cannot bypass the
consequences of such statutory vesting merely by invoking
the machinery under the Wakf Act. The Court further held
that a Gazette notification under the Wakf Act could not
override the statutory consequence of vesting and that
proceedings under Section 54 could not be employed to
evict persons whose rights arose from a lawful occupancy
order under the applicable inam abolition legislation.
24. The ratio of the said decision is directly
attracted to the controversy before this Court. In the
present case also, the historical documents relied upon by
the petitioner disclose that the property was treated as an
inam, that it vested in the State and that thereafter a re-
grant was made in favour of Babasab. More importantly,
the order granting/re-granting rights in favour of Babasab
has not been challenged by the Wakf Board before the
competent forum.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 14 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


25. Once the re-grant has attained finality, the
Wakf authorities cannot, in collateral proceedings, simply
disregard its legal consequences and proceed on the
assumption that Babasab held the property merely as a
trustee.
26. The judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in Sri
Babuchandkote v. The State (supra), also assumes
relevance. The controversy in that case involved
competing claims arising out of the inam abolition/land-
reforms regime and a claim of Wakf character. The
principle emerging from the said line of authority is that
the original nature of the grant and the statutory
consequences flowing from abolition of the inam cannot be
ignored merely because the property is subsequently
asserted to be Wakf property.
27. The said decision, therefore, supports the
proposition that the Court must first ascertain the juridical
source and character of the land before giving effect to a
subsequent claim based upon a Wakf entry or notification.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 15 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


28. The subsequent judgment in Karnataka State
Board of Wakfs v. The Land Tribunal (supra) provides
a more detailed exposition of this principle and, in
particular, examines the effect of statutory vesting and the
limited efficacy of a subsequent Wakf notification in
relation to an inam property.
29. The petitioner has also relied upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Salem Muslim
Burial Ground Protection Committee v. State of
(supra). The Hon’ble Apex Court, while
Tamil Nadu
examining the statutory scheme governing identification
and publication of Wakf properties, emphasised that the
preliminary survey and the enquiry contemplated under
the Wakf Act precede publication of the list of Wakfs. The
Hon’ble Apex Court held that where the statutory survey
process had not been undertaken or established by
material on record, a mere notification could not, by itself,
constitute conclusive proof of the Wakf character of the
property.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 16 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


30. The significance of this judgment in the present
case is not that every Wakf notification is necessarily
invalid. The principle is narrower and more fundamental:
where the Wakf character of a property is specifically
disputed and the claimant produces material
demonstrating a contrary source of title, the authorities
cannot treat a mere entry or notification as an answer to
the dispute without establishing the statutory foundation
and the underlying Wakf character of the property.
31. In the present case, the Tribunal has failed to
undertake that exercise. The impugned judgment proceeds
substantially on the premise that the property was Wakf
property and that Babasab was merely a trustee.
However, the Tribunal has not undertaken a meaningful
examination of the documents relating to the abolition of
the inam, vesting of the land in the State, re-grant in
favour of Babasab and subsequent mutation. This omission
goes to the root of the matter. If the land had vested in
the State and was thereafter re-granted in favour of
Babasab in his individual capacity, the respondents were
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 17 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


required to establish by acceptable evidence the precise
legal basis on which the land nevertheless continued to be
Wakf property.
32. The Tribunal has not recorded any finding as to:
the original grant; the nature of the inam; the effect of
abolition of the inam; the statutory vesting of the land;
the legal character of the re-grant dated 07.02.1962; the
basis on which Babasab was described as a trustee; the
existence of any valid dedication of the property to Wakf;
the survey proceedings preceding the alleged Wakf
inclusion; or the basis on which the property came to be
subsequently inserted in the Wakf records.
33. In the absence of findings on these foundational
aspects, the conclusion that the property is Wakf property
cannot be sustained.
34. The petitioner has thereafter acquired the
property under a registered sale deed executed by
Hussainsab, who succeeded to the property after the
demise of Babasab. It is not necessary, in the present
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 18 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


proceedings, to pronounce upon every aspect of the
validity of the sale deed as against the original re-grantee.
However, the existence of the registered conveyance and
the subsequent mutation and CTS entries cannot simply
be ignored while determining whether the property can be
taken over as Wakf property.
35. Once the respondents sought to dispossess the
petitioner on the assertion that the property belonged to
the Wakf, the authorities were required to first establish
the superior legal title of the Wakf. They could not reverse
the burden by treating the petitioner’s registered sale deed
as void merely because the Wakf authorities subsequently
asserted a claim over the property. The creation of third-
party rights pursuant to the re-grant and subsequent
registered conveyance is therefore a relevant circumstance
which the Tribunal was required to consider.
36. There is yet another infirmity which vitiates the
impugned proceedings. The petitioner specifically asserts
that he was not issued notice before the order dated
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 19 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


12.01.2014 was passed directing that possession be taken
and handed over to the Wakf authorities. The respondents
have not demonstrated that the petitioner was afforded an
effective opportunity to establish his title and possession
before an order affecting his proprietary and possessory
rights was passed.
37. The requisition dated 02.09.2011 could not, by
itself, authorise dispossession of a person who was
admittedly in possession and who claimed under a
registered sale deed. The authority was required to
conduct an enquiry into the competing claims and to pass
a reasoned order after giving the affected person an
opportunity of hearing.An administrative order resulting in
deprivation of possession cannot be sustained where the
person directly affected was not afforded an opportunity to
establish the source of his title.
38. The impugned order dated 12.01.2014 is also
vulnerable because it appears to have proceeded
substantially on the basis of the requisition dated
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 20 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


02.09.2011. A requisition is only an initiating or
consequential administrative step. It cannot constitute
proof of title. The requisitioning authority could not, by
issuing such requisition, conclusively determine that the
subject property was Wakf property and thereafter require
another authority to dispossess the person in possession.
The statutory authorities were required to independently
examine the legal and factual foundation of the claim. The
Tribunal, in turn, was required to examine whether that
foundational determination was legally sustainable. That
exercise is conspicuously absent.
Conclusion:
39. The present case is therefore not a case where
the petitioner seeks to defeat an established Wakf merely
on the strength of a private sale deed. The petitioner’s
claim has a much earlier foundation. The material on
record traces the origin of the property to an inam tenure,
followed by statutory vesting, subsequent re-grant in
favour of Babasab, mutation pursuant thereto, inheritance
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 21 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


and ultimately a registered conveyance in favour of the
petitioner.
40. The order granting/re-granting the property in
favour of Babasab has not been shown to have been
annulled or set aside by any competent authority. In the
absence of such challenge, the Wakf authorities could not
simply proceed on the premise that Babasab was only a
trustee and that the property continued to belong to the
Wakf.
41. The judgments relied upon by the petitioner,
particularly Sri Babuchandkote (supra) and Karnataka
State Board of Wakfs v. The Land Tribunal (supra),
make it clear that the statutory consequences flowing from
abolition of an inam and vesting of the property cannot be
displaced merely by relying upon a subsequent Wakf
notification or entry. The judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Salem Muslim Burial Ground
Protection Committee (supra) further underscores the
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 22 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


importance of compliance with the statutory survey and
enquiry preceding inclusion of a property in the Wakf list.
42. In the present case, neither the foundational
title of the Wakf nor the statutory basis for treating the
subject property as Wakf property has been satisfactorily
established. The Tribunal has also failed to examine the
effect of the statutory vesting and subsequent re-grant.
The impugned order is therefore rendered unsustainable.
43. Accordingly Point Nos.(i) and (ii) are answered
in the ‘ and in favour of the petitioner, holding
negative’
that the Wakf authorities have failed to establish that the
subject property continued to retain the character of Wakf
property notwithstanding its statutory vesting and
subsequent re-grant.
44. Point No.(iii) is also answered in the
‘ affirmative’ and in favour of the petitioner, holding that
the proceedings resulting in the order dated 12.01.2014
suffer from failure of proper enquiry and violation of the
principles of natural justice. Point No.(iv) is accordingly
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 23 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


answered in the ‘ affirmative’ and in favour of the
petitioner.
45. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed .
(ii) The judgment dated 23.04.2014
passed in No.KWT/BGM/SR/Appeal No.4/2014
by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge
and Wakf Tribunal, produced at Annexure-Q, is
hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The order dated 12.01.2014 passed
by respondent No.2, produced at Annexure-H,
and the requisition dated 02.09.2011 issued by
respondent No.1, produced at Annexure-G,
insofar as they relate to the subject property
bearing Sy.No.38A/5A measuring 1 acre 6
guntas, are hereby quashed.
(iv) The respondents are restrained from
dispossessing the petitioner from the subject
property pursuant to the impugned
proceedings.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 24 -
WP No. 105744 of 2014


(v) It is made clear that this order shall
not preclude the Wakf authorities from
establishing their title, if any, before the
competent forum in accordance with law, upon
production of legally admissible material
establishing the Wakf character of the subject
property.
(vi) All pending interlocutory applications,
if any, stand disposed of.


Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

Verified
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE




CA