BAZME TOHID TANZEEM vs THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
R
CNR: KAHC020031462026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 19 DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 101523 OF 2026 (GM-WAKF)
BETWEEN:
1. BAZME TOHID TANZEEM
COMMITTEE, MUDALAGI,
TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI,
R/BY ITS PRESIDENT,
MALIKJAN S/O. DASTAGIRSAHEB KALLIMANI,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC. PRESIDENT,
R/O. BAZME TOHID TANZEEM
COMMITTEE, MUDALAGI-591312,
TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI.
2. BAZME TOHID TANZEEM
COMMITTEE, MUDALAGI,
TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI,
R/BY ITS SECRETARY,
MADARSAB S/O. HASANSAB MUGATKHAN,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC. SECRETARY,
R/O. BAZME TOHID TANZEEM
COMMITTEE, MUDALAGI-591312,
TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI.
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF AUQAF,
DARUL AWKAF, #6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BENGALURU-560052.
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
2. THE DISTRICT WAQF OFFICER,
DISTRICT WAQF OFFICE,
ST
58/8, 1 ‘A’ CROSS ROAD,
NEAR BASAVA CIRCLE,
VITHAL DAMODAR NAGAR,
CHIKODI-591201,
TQ. CHIKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI.
3. SHRI. ANWAR MOHAMMADALI NADAF,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC. CLAIMING TO BE
R/O. LAXMI NAGAR, MUDALAGI-591312,
TQ. MUDALAGI, DIST. BELAGAVI.
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.L. LADKHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. CHETAN T. LIMBIKAI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED OFFICIAL
MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.KSBA/CMC/26/BGM/2017-18
ST
DATED 12.02.2026 ISSUED BY THE 1 RESPONDENT BOARD
RD
THEREBY APPOINTING ADHOC COMMITTEE HEADED BY 3
RESPONDENT, AS PER ANNEXURE-A (IN SO FAR AS
PETITIONERS CONCERNED) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
The captioned writ petition is filed by the petitioners,
claiming to be the President and Secretary of the Wakf
institution, assailing the constitution of an ad-hoc
committee by respondent No.1-Karnataka State Board of
Auqaf.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.1-Board and learned counsel appearing for the
members of the ad-hoc committee. Perused the records
and considered the rival submissions.
3. The principal grievance of the petitioners is
that, despite specific directions issued by this Court in
W.P.No.103173/2022 and W.P.No.103432/2025,
respondent No.1-Board has repeatedly proceeded to
appoint an Administrator or constitute an ad-hoc
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
committee, without following the procedure contemplated
under Rule 54 of the Karnataka Wakf Rules, 2017.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would
contend that Rule 54 prescribes a complete mechanism for
constitution of the succeeding managing committee.
According to him, once the tenure of the existing
committee comes to an end and the succeeding committee
has not been constituted, the management and
supervision of the Wakf institution automatically vest in
the concerned District Wakf Officer under sub-rule (5) of
Rule 54. It is therefore contended that the Board could not
have bypassed the statutory mechanism and constituted
an ad-hoc committee for a further period of eleven
months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would
further contend that the conduct of respondent No.1-Board
is contrary to the directions issued by this Court on earlier
occasions. He would submit that the petitioners’
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
committee had submitted proposals for constitution of a
new managing committee, but instead of processing the
same in accordance with the Rules, the Board proceeded
to appoint an Administrator. Such action compelled the
petitioners to approach this Court in W.P.No.103173/2022,
wherein interim protection was granted and the
appointment of the Administrator was stayed.
6. It is further contended that the said writ
petition came to be disposed of on 18.03.2024 directing
the parties to maintain status quo. Thereafter, according
to the petitioners, a fresh representation dated
01.04.2024 was submitted requesting the Board to
consider the proposal already submitted for constitution of
a new committee. However, instead of undertaking the
exercise contemplated under the statutory Rules, the
Board once again proceeded to appoint an Administrator.
7. The learned counsel would further submit that
the subsequent writ petition in W.P.No.103432/2025 was
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
allowed by order dated 29.10.2025. In the said
proceedings, this Court noticed that the earlier order
directing maintenance of status quo had not been adhered
to and consequently directed the Board to redo the
exercise, bearing in mind the observations made by the
Coordinate Bench. The order passed in
W.P.No.103432/2025 records that the impugned action
had been taken during the subsistence of the order of
status quo and, consequently, the impugned orders were
required to be obliterated and the matter remitted to the
Board for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
8. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioners
question the subsequent Official Memorandum constituting
an eleven-member ad-hoc committee for a period of
eleven months. The submission is that the impugned
action is nothing but a repetition of the very course of
action which had earlier been deprecated by this Court.
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also
placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in
Managing Committee, Masjid-E-Idgah, Mysore and
1
Another v. State of Karnataka and Others ,
contending that once a managing committee is
constituted, the Board cannot, at its sweet will, displace
such committee except in accordance with the statutory
provisions. The said decision has been understood as
holding that the power of the Board is circumscribed by
the provisions of the Wakf Act and cannot be exercised
dehors the statutory framework.
10. Per contra, Sri. D.L. Ladkhan, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.1-Board, has raised a
preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ
petition. His contention is that the petitioners have an
efficacious alternative remedy before the Wakf Tribunal
under Section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995 and, therefore,
1
1997 SCC Online kar 147
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
this Court ought not to entertain the present writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
11. To buttress the said contention, learned counsel
has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Coordinate
Bench in W.P.No.104387/2024, which was affirmed by the
Division Bench in W.A.No.100561/2024. The said
proceedings concerned a challenge to an order of the
Karnataka State Board of Auqaf approving amendment of
the jurisdiction in the scheme of administration of a Wakf
institution. The Division Bench upheld the view that, in the
facts of that case, the appropriate remedy was before the
Wakf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Wakf Act.
12. Learned counsel has also placed reliance upon
the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Board of
Wakf, West Bengal and Another v. Anis Fatma
2
Begum and Another . The principle relied upon is that
the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 is intended
2
(2010) 14 SCC 588
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
to adjudicate disputes, questions or other matters relating
to a Wakf or Wakf property and that ordinarily a party
should approach the Tribunal in the first instance instead
of invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
13. Learned counsel appearing for the ad-hoc
committee has also adopted the submissions advanced by
learned counsel for respondent No.1 and has strenuously
contended that the writ petition is not maintainable in view
of the statutory remedy available under Section 83 of the
Wakf Act.
14. Both learned counsel appearing for the
respondents have also addressed the Court on the merits
and submitted that Section 32(2)(o) of the Wakf Act
confers sufficiently wide power upon the Board to do all
such acts as may be necessary for the control,
maintenance and administration of auqaf and that the
constitution of an ad-hoc committee is an administrative
measure falling within the said power.
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
15. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the material on record, the following
points arise for consideration:
( i) Whether the constitution of an ad-hoc
committee for a period of eleven months is amenable
to writ jurisdiction?
(ii) Whether Section 6 of the Wakf Act, 1995
covers a dispute regarding constitution of an ad-hoc
committee by the State Wakf Board and,
consequently, whether the petitioners are required to
institute proceedings before the Wakf Tribunal under
Section 83(1) and (2) of the Wakf Act?
(iii) Whether constitution of an ad-hoc
committee for a period of eleven months violates the
mandate contained in Section 32 of the Wakf Act
read with Rules 48 and 54 of the Karnataka Wakf
Rules, 2017?
Finding on Point Nos.(i) and (ii):
16. Before proceeding to consider the rival
submissions, it would be apposite to extract Section 6 of
the Wakf Act, 1995. The same reads as under:
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
"6. Disputes regarding [auqaf].— (1) If any
question arises whether a particular property
specified as waqf property in the list of auqaf is waqf
property or not or whether a waqf specified in such
list is a Shia waqf or Sunni waqf, the Board or the
mutawalli of the waqf or any person aggrieved may
institute a suit in a Tribunal for the decision of the
question and the decision of the Tribunal in respect
of such matter shall be final:
Provided that no such suit shall be entertained
by the Tribunal after the expiry of one year from the
date of the publication of the list of auqaf:
Provided further that no suit shall be instituted
before the Tribunal in respect of such properties
notified in a second or subsequent survey pursuant
to the provisions contained in sub-section (6) of
section 4.
Explanation.-xxxxx
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (1), no proceeding under this Act in respect
of any waqf shall be stayed by reason only of the
pendency of any such suit or of any appeal or other
proceeding arising out of such suit.
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
(3) The Survey Commissioner shall not be
made a party to any suit under sub-section (1) and
no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall
lie against him in respect of anything which is in
good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance
of this Act or any rules made thereunder.
(4) The list of auqaf shall, unless it is modified
in pursuance of a decision of the Tribunal under sub-
section (1), be final and conclusive.
(5) On and from the commencement of this Act
in a State, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be
instituted or commenced in a Court in that State in
relation to any question referred to in sub-section
(1)."
17. It would also be apposite to extract Section 7 of
the Wakf Act, which confers the power of Tribunal to
determine disputes regarding wakfs. The same reads as
under:
"7. Power of Tribunal to determine
disputes regarding auqaf.— (1) If, after the
commencement of this Act, any question or dispute
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
arises, whether a particular property specified as
waqf property in a list of auqaf is waqf property or
not, or whether a waqf specified in such list is a Shia
waqf or a Sunni waqf, the Board or the mutawalli of
the waqf, or any person aggrieved by the publication
of the list of auqaf under section 5 therein, may
apply to the Tribunal having jurisdiction in relation to
such property, for the decision of the question and
the decision of the Tribunal thereon shall be final:
Provided that—
(a) in the case of the list of auqaf relating to
any part of the State and published after the
commencement of this Act no such application shall
be entertained after the expiry of one year from the
date of publication of the list of auqaf; and
(b) in the case of the list of auqaf relating to
any part of the State and published at any time
within a period of one year immediately preceding
the commencement of this Act, such an application
may be entertained by Tribunal within the period of
one year from such commencement:
Provided further that where any such question
has been heard and finally decided by a Civil Court in
a suit instituted before such commencement, the
Tribunal shall not re-open such question.
(2) Except where the Tribunal has no
jurisdiction by reason of the provisions of sub-section
(5), no proceeding under this section in respect of
any waqf shall be stayed by any Court, Tribunal or
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
other authority by reason only of the pendency of
any suit, application or appeal or other proceeding
arising out of any such suit, application, appeal or
other proceeding.
(3) The Chief Executive Officer shall not be
made a party to any application under sub-section
(1).
(4) The list of auqaf and where any such list is
modified in pursuance of a decision of the Tribunal
under sub-section (1), the list as so modified, shall
be final.
(5) The Tribunal shall not have jurisdiction to
determine any matter which is the subject-matter of
any suit or proceeding instituted or commenced in a
Civil Court under sub-section (1) of Section 6, before
the commencement of this Act or which is the
subject-matter of any appeal from the decree passed
before such commencement in any such suit or
proceeding or of any application for revision or
review arising out of such suit, proceeding or appeal,
as the case may be.
(6) The Tribunal shall have the powers of
assessment of damages by unauthorised occupation
of waqf property and to penalise such unauthorised
occupants for their illegal occupation of the waqf
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
property and to recover the damages as arrears of
land revenue through the Collector:
Provided that whosoever, being a public
servant, fails in his lawful duty to prevent or remove
an encroachment, shall on conviction be punishable
with fine which may extend to fifteen thousand
rupees for each such offence."
18. A conjoint reading of Sections 6, 7 and 83 of
the Wakf Act makes it clear that the jurisdiction of the
Wakf Tribunal is attracted in respect of those disputes,
questions or matters which the Act specifically requires to
be determined by the Tribunal. Section 6, in particular, is
concerned with a specific class of disputes, namely,
whether a particular property specified as Wakf property in
the list of auqaf is Wakf property or not and whether a
Wakf specified in such list is a Shia Wakf or Sunni Wakf.
The present proceedings do not involve determination of
either of these questions. The petitioners do not dispute
the character of the institution as a Wakf, nor do they seek
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
adjudication of any question concerning the title to, or
character of, any Wakf property.
19. It is equally necessary to notice the scope of
Section 83. Sub-section (1) enables the State Government
to constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit for
determination of any dispute, question or other matter
relating to a Wakf or Wakf property under the Act and
required by or under the Act to be determined by a
Tribunal. Sub-section (3) further provides that where any
dispute, question or other matter relating to a Wakf or
Wakf property arises and is required by or under the Act to
be determined by a Tribunal, such dispute, question or
other matter shall be determined by the Tribunal. Sub-
section (5) clothes the Tribunal with the powers of a Civil
Court while trying a suit or executing a decree or order,
and prescribes the procedure applicable to the proceedings
before it. The aforesaid provisions, therefore, cannot be
construed to mean that every administrative action of the
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
Wakf Board, merely because it relates to the management
of a Wakf institution, is necessarily immune from scrutiny
under Article 226 of the Constitution.
20. The distinction between the jurisdiction of the
Wakf Tribunal and the constitutional jurisdiction of the
High Court assumes significance in the present case. The
petitioners are not seeking adjudication of title,
possession, the character of the Wakf property, or any
other disputed question requiring a trial. Their challenge is
directed against the legality of the very exercise of power
by respondent No.1-Board in constituting an ad-hoc
committee for eleven months, allegedly in disregard of the
mandatory mechanism prescribed under Rule 54 of the
Karnataka Wakf Rules, 2017 and, more importantly,
contrary to the directions already issued by this Court in
the earlier writ proceedings.
21. The respondents have placed considerable
reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
in Anis Fatima Begum (supra). There can be no quarrel
with the general proposition that where the Wakf Act
provides a specialised statutory forum for determination of
a dispute, the litigant ought ordinarily to avail such
remedy before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of
the High Court. However, the said judgment cannot be
read as laying down an absolute proposition that the High
Court is denuded of jurisdiction under Article 226 in every
matter which has a connection with a Wakf or Wakf
property.
22. The distinction has subsequently been
authoritatively noticed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
State of Andhra Pradesh (now State of Telangana) v.
3
A.P. State Waqf Board . In the said case, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court considered the objection that, having
regard to Sections 6, 7, 83 and 85 of the Wakf Act, the
parties ought to have been relegated to the Wakf Tribunal.
3
2022 INSC 155
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
While examining the earlier judgment in Anis Fatima
Begum (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court specifically
distinguished the same and clarified the circumstances in
which the availability of a remedy before the Wakf Tribunal
would operate as a reason for declining writ jurisdiction.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court noticed that Anis Fatima
Begum (supra), did not arise out of a writ petition before
the High Court and that the observations therein could not
be understood as laying down an absolute bar against
exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 in matters
concerning the legality of an action of the Wakf Board.
23. The principle emerging from State of Andhra
Pradesh v. A.P. State Waqf Board (supra) is that the
Court must first examine the nature and substance of the
challenge and ascertain whether the dispute is one which
is required by or under the Wakf Act to be determined by
the Tribunal. The mere fact that the subject matter relates
to a Wakf or Wakf property is not, by itself, sufficient to
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
oust the jurisdiction of the High Court. Where the
challenge is directed against the legality, validity or
competence of the action of the Wakf Board itself,
particularly where the grievance is that the Board has
acted contrary to the statutory provisions governing the
exercise of its power, the existence of an alternative
remedy before the Tribunal does not constitute an
absolute bar to the exercise of jurisdiction under Article
226.
24. The ratio of State of Andhra Pradesh v. A.P.
State Waqf Board (supra) is particularly apposite to the
controversy before this Court. In that case also, the
challenge was directed against an action of the Wakf
Board itself. The Hon’ble Supreme Court declined to accept
the proposition that the parties should invariably be
relegated to the Wakf Tribunal merely because the matter
concerned a Wakf. The Supreme Court examined the
legality of the impugned action of the Board in exercise of
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
its constitutional and judicial review jurisdiction. The
decision thus makes it clear that the principle stated in
Anis Fatima Begum has to be understood in the context in
which it was rendered and cannot be expanded into an
absolute exclusion of writ jurisdiction.
25. This distinction is crucial. Anis Fatima Begum
(supra) recognises the desirability of approaching the
specialised Tribunal where the dispute falls within the
jurisdiction conferred upon it by the Wakf Act. State of
Andhra Pradesh v. A.P. State Waqf Board (supra),
however, makes it equally clear that such principle does
not operate as an absolute embargo where the grievance
is directed against the legality of the action of the Board
itself and where the matter does not require adjudication
of disputed questions of title or other questions which the
statute specifically entrusts to the Tribunal.
26. The present case stands on a still stronger
footing. The petitioners are not challenging an approved
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
scheme of administration so as to invite adjudication
under Section 69 read with Section 83 of the Wakf Act.
They are not questioning the validity of any entry in the
list of auqaf. They are not seeking a declaration
concerning the nature or character of any Wakf property.
They are questioning the action of the Board in bypassing
the statutory procedure for constitution of the succeeding
managing committee and in substituting the procedure
mandated under Rule 54 by an ad-hoc arrangement for a
period of eleven months.
27. The decision relied upon by the respondents in
W.P.No.104387/2024, affirmed in W.A.No.100561/2024, is
also distinguishable on facts and in law. In those
proceedings, the challenge was essentially directed against
an order relating to the scheme of administration of the
Wakf institution. The question, therefore, fell within the
field in which the Wakf Act provides a specific remedy
before the Tribunal. The present case is fundamentally
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
different. Here, there is no challenge to an approved
scheme. Rather, the petitioners complain that the Board
has failed to follow the statutory mechanism for bringing
into existence the succeeding committee and, instead, has
created an ad-hoc committee contrary to Rule 54.
28. There is yet another distinguishing feature
which cannot be overlooked. The present impugned action
has been preceded by repeated judicial proceedings before
this Court. In W.P.No.103173/2022, this Court had
intervened in relation to the appointment of an
Administrator. The said proceedings ultimately came to be
disposed of on 18.03.2024 directing the parties to
maintain status quo . Thereafter, when the Board again
proceeded to appoint an Administrator, the petitioners
were constrained to approach this Court in
W.P.No.103432/2025. The said writ petition was allowed
by order dated 29.10.2025 and the appointment of the
Administrator was quashed, with a direction to the Board
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
to redo the exercise bearing in mind the observations
made by the Coordinate Bench.
29. The impugned Official Memorandum has
thereafter been issued constituting an ad-hoc committee
for eleven months. The question before this Court,
therefore, is not merely whether the petitioners are
aggrieved by the composition of the committee. The
question is whether respondent No.1-Board, after having
been directed by this Court to redo the exercise in
accordance with law, could once again bypass the
statutory mechanism contained in Rule 54 and constitute
an ad-hoc committee for a substantial period of eleven
months.
30. Such a challenge is fundamentally a challenge
to the exercise of statutory power. It concerns the
competence of the Board to adopt the particular course of
action, the manner in which the statutory power has been
exercised and the Board’s compliance with the mandatory
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
Rules framed under the Act. It does not call upon this
Court to undertake a trial or adjudicate disputed questions
of fact. The issue is capable of determination on the basis
of the impugned Official Memorandum, the statutory
provisions and the orders already passed by this Court.
31. The respondents’ contention, if accepted in its
absolute form, would result in an anomalous position.
Even where the Wakf Board acts in patent disregard of the
statutory Rules or in breach of a binding direction issued
by the High Court, the aggrieved person would be
compelled to institute proceedings before the Tribunal
merely because the order concerns the management of a
Wakf institution. Such an interpretation would effectively
immunise statutory authorities from judicial review and
cannot be accepted as the correct understanding of
Sections 83 and 85 of the Wakf Act.
32. The rule requiring exhaustion of an alternative
remedy is a rule of discretion and self-restraint. It does
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
not extinguish the constitutional power of the High Court
under Article 226. The existence of an alternative remedy
is undoubtedly a relevant consideration, however, where
the action complained of is alleged to be without
jurisdiction, in violation of a mandatory statutory
provision, in breach of principles of natural justice or in
disregard of binding judicial directions, the High Court is
entitled to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction.
33. In the present case, the impugned action is
alleged to suffer from precisely such infirmity. The
petitioners contend, and the impugned Official
Memorandum itself discloses, that the ad-hoc committee
was constituted as a “special case” upon the
recommendation of the Hon’ble Minister for Wakf. The
Board has not demonstrated why the statutory
consequence under Rule 54(5) was not required to be
followed, nor has it demonstrated any statutory provision
authorising constitution of an ad-hoc committee for eleven
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
months in substitution of the mechanism expressly
prescribed under the Rules.
34. This Court is, therefore, of the considered view
that the ratio of State of Andhra Pradesh v. A.P. State
Waqf Board (supra) squarely answers the preliminary
objection raised by the respondents. The judgment in Anis
Fatima Begum (supra) does not constitute an absolute
bar to exercise of writ jurisdiction in a case where the
challenge is directed against the legality of the action of
the Wakf Board itself. The Court is required to examine
the nature of the dispute, the statutory source of the
impugned action and whether the Act mandates that such
dispute be determined by the Tribunal. In the present
case, the challenge is to the Board’s exercise of power
contrary to Rule 54 and contrary to the directions issued
by this Court. Such a challenge is amenable to judicial
review under Article 226.
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
35. Accordingly, this Court holds that the
petitioners cannot be non-suited merely on the ground
that the Wakf Tribunal is constituted under Section 83 of
the Wakf Act. The present challenge does not seek
adjudication of a dispute which the Act specifically requires
to be determined by the Tribunal. The extraordinary
jurisdiction of this Court is, therefore, available to test the
legality of the impugned Official Memorandum.
36. Accordingly, Point No.(i) is answered in the
‘ affirmative’ and point No.(ii) is answered in the
‘ negative’ , holding that the present writ petition is
maintainable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case and that the petitioners are not required to be
relegated to the Wakf Tribunal.
Finding on Point No.(iii):
37. Before proceeding to examine the legality of the
impugned constitution of the ad-hoc committee, it would
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
be apposite to extract Rule 54 of the Karnataka Wakf
Rules, 2017. The same is extracted hereunder:
" 54. Appointment of Muthawallies or
Managing Committees.- (1) The Board shall
appoint Mutawallies or constitute managing
committees under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of
Section 32 on receipt of proposals forwarded in
accordance with the respective Scheme of
Management.
(2) Such committees shall initiate process of
constitution of succeeding committee as per the
approved Scheme of Management three months prior
to the expiry of the term of the committee and shall
complete the entire process of constitution of
succeeding committee within two months prior to
expiry of the term of the committee.
(3) The District Waqf Officer of the respective
district shall supervise the process of
appointment/constitution of succeeding committee.
(4) If in the event of the existing committee
fails to initiate and complete the process for
constitution of succeeding committee within the time
prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 52 of the
District Waqf Officer shall initiate such process within
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 30 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
two months prior to the expiry of the term of the
existing committee and complete the process prior to
the expiry of the term of the existing committee.
(5) If for any reasons succeeding committee is
not constituted or appointed, the management and
supervision of such Waqf Institution shall
automatically vest with the concerned District Waqf
Officer and the District Waqf Officer or any other
Officer authorised by the Board shall carry out duties
and functions as delegated by the Karnataka State
Board of Auqaf. He shall take action to get the
succeeding committee constituted within a period of
three months.
(6) Such committees shall cease to have any
power or authority for management of such Waqf
Institution including operation of bank accounts after
expiry of the term."
38. A plain reading of Rule 54 discloses a structured
statutory mechanism. Sub-rule (1) contemplates
constitution of a managing committee by the Board on
receipt of proposals forwarded in accordance with the
respective scheme of management. Sub-rules (2) and (3)
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 31 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
prescribe the role of the existing committee and the
District Waqf Officer in initiating and supervising the
process for constitution of the succeeding committee. Sub-
rule (4) steps in where the existing committee fails to
initiate or complete the process. Most importantly, sub-
rule (5) provides the statutory consequence where, for any
reason, the succeeding committee is not constituted or
appointed: the management and supervision of the Wakf
institution automatically vest in the concerned District
Waqf Officer, who is required to take steps to secure
constitution of the succeeding committee within three
months.
39. The language employed in sub-rule (5) is
significant. The Rule does not confer an unfettered
discretion upon the Board to devise any alternative
arrangement of its choice upon expiry of the tenure of the
existing committee. It specifically identifies the authority
who is to assume management and supervision in the
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 32 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
interregnum and further casts a duty upon that authority
to secure constitution of the succeeding committee.
40. In the present case, the tenure of the earlier
committee expired on 12.06.2023. The Board was
therefore required to act within the statutory framework.
Instead, the record discloses repeated appointment of an
Administrator and, subsequently, constitution of an ad-hoc
committee for eleven months.
41. The impugned Official Memorandum itself
assumes significance. The relevant portion of the Official
Memorandum is extracted as under:
"......The Board under order
No.KSBA/CMC/26/BGM/2017-18 dated: 13.06.2019
has constituted Managing Committee for the
management of the said Waqf institution. For a period
of three (03) years and the said term of the managing
committee expired on 12.06.2023. The Ex-Managing
Committee have submitted proposal for the installation
of Adhoc committee of 11 (Eleven) Members with
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 33 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
recommendation of Hon'ble Minister of Waqf to
consider as special case.
Accordingly, the above subject was placed before
th
the meeting of the 365 Board meeting with
permission of the Chair Subject No.8.
th
Further, the 365 Board vide its order dated
07.02.2026 with the permission of the Chair Subject
No.8 approved the Adhoc Committee for a period of
Eleven (11) for managing the above said Waqf
institution."
(emphasis supplied)
42. The above recital leaves no manner of doubt
that the proposal for constitution of the ad-hoc committee
was placed before the Board with the recommendation of
the Hon’ble Minister for Wakf and was specifically sought
to be considered as a “special case”. The Board thereafter
approved the ad-hoc committee for a period of eleven
months.
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 34 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
43. The question is not whether the Board
possesses general supervisory powers over auqaf. Section
32 undoubtedly vests general superintendence of auqaf in
the Board and enables it to take measures for their proper
maintenance, control and administration. However, the
exercise of a general power must necessarily yield to a
specific statutory procedure governing a particular field.
Where the Rules framed under the Act prescribe the
manner in which the succeeding managing committee has
to be constituted and specifically provide for the
consequence of failure to constitute such committee, the
Board cannot bypass that mechanism by resorting to an
ad-hoc arrangement.
44. The submission that Section 32(2)(o) confers
wide residuary power upon the Board also cannot be
accepted in the manner canvassed by the respondents.
Clause (o) enables the Board to generally do all such acts
as may be necessary for the control, maintenance and
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 35 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
administration of auqaf. The expression “necessary”
cannot be construed as conferring an independent and
unrestricted power to disregard a specific statutory Rule. A
general enabling provision cannot be invoked to defeat an
express procedure prescribed by Rules framed under the
very enactment.
45. If the contention of the Board were to be
accepted, Rule 54(5) would become virtually redundant.
Whenever the tenure of a managing committee expires
and a succeeding committee is not constituted, the Board
could simply invoke Section 32(2)(o), constitute an ad-hoc
committee for any period and thereby circumvent the
statutory consequence expressly prescribed under Rule
54(5). Such an interpretation would render the specific
statutory scheme nugatory and therefore cannot be
accepted.
46. The decision in Managing Committee, Masjid-E-
Idgah, Mysore reinforces this conclusion. The statutory
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 36 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
authority cannot claim an unrestricted power to alter the
management of a Wakf institution merely because it
exercises general superintendence over auqaf. Its power
must be traced to and exercised in accordance with the
Act and the Rules.
47. The subsequent judicial history also assumes
importance. In W.P.No.103432/2025, this Court had
already noticed that an action had been taken during the
subsistence of the order of status quo and consequently
directed the Board to redo the exercise in accordance with
law. The impugned Official Memorandum, however,
proceeds to constitute an ad-hoc committee without
demonstrating compliance with the procedure which this
Court had directed the Board to undertake.
48. The Court is therefore constrained to hold that
the impugned order is not a mere administrative
arrangement made to facilitate the day-to-day functioning
of the Wakf institution. It has the effect of displacing the
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 37 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
statutory mechanism under Rule 54 and creating an
alternative management structure for a substantial period
of eleven months.
49. There is also considerable force in the
submission that the Board ought to have directed the
concerned District Waqf Officer to take charge in terms of
Rule 54(5) and thereafter undertake the process of
constitution of the succeeding committee. The Rule itself
provides the course to be adopted where the succeeding
committee is not constituted. There was, therefore, no
occasion for the Board to invent a parallel mechanism in
the form of an ad-hoc committee.
50. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has also
referred to Rule 48 and submitted that formulation of a
scheme has to be undertaken in the prescribed manner
and by furnishing Form-42 under the Karnataka Wakf
Rules, 2017. There is no quarrel with the said submission.
On the contrary, the same reinforces the conclusion that
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 38 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
the Board and the District Waqf Officer are required to
undertake the statutory process and secure formulation of
a proper scheme rather than indefinitely continue an ad-
hoc arrangement.
51. The material on record further demonstrates
that the issue has remained unresolved for several years.
The existence of an ad-hoc committee cannot be permitted
to become a substitute for the statutory scheme
contemplated under the Rules. An interim arrangement, if
permissible in law, must remain genuinely interim and
cannot be employed to defeat the prescribed mechanism
for constitution of the regular managing committee.
52. This Court is also conscious that the writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary. The Court
does not ordinarily interfere where an efficacious
alternative statutory remedy exists. However, the present
case presents exceptional circumstances. The petitioners
have demonstrated repeated proceedings before this
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 39 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
Court, repeated directions requiring the Board to
undertake the statutory exercise, and a subsequent order
passed by the Board constituting an ad-hoc committee for
eleven months instead of following the mechanism
prescribed under Rule 54.
53. The principle governing exercise of writ
jurisdiction is therefore not one of absolute exclusion. The
existence of an alternative remedy is a rule of self-
restraint and not a bar to jurisdiction. Where the action of
a statutory authority is alleged to be without authority of
law, contrary to mandatory statutory provisions, or in
disregard of binding orders of the Court, the High Court is
entitled to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to ensure
that statutory authorities act within the limits of the power
conferred upon them.
54. In the present case, the impugned Official
Memorandum cannot be sustained as a lawful exercise of
power under Section 32(2)(o). The Board was required to
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 40 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
follow the specific mechanism under Rule 54. The
constitution of an ad-hoc committee for eleven months,
particularly after the earlier directions issued by this Court,
amounts to bypassing that mechanism. Accordingly, Point
No.(iii) is answered in the ‘ affirmative’ .
55. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, this
Court is of the considered view that the impugned Official
Memorandum dated 12.02.2026 is unsustainable in law
and is liable to be quashed. The appropriate course is to
restore the statutory mechanism by directing the District
Waqf Officer to assume management and supervision and
undertake the process of constitution of the succeeding
committee in accordance with Rules 48 and 54 of the
Karnataka Wakf Rules, 2017.
56. Before parting with the matter, it is necessary
to clarify that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the rival claims of the petitioners or any
other interested person to be appointed or elected as
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 41 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
members of the succeeding managing committee. The
District Waqf Officer shall undertake the exercise strictly in
accordance with the Rules, after giving due opportunity to
all persons legitimately interested in the management of
the Wakf institution.
57. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed .
(ii) The impugned Official Memorandum
dated 12.02.2026 issued by respondent No.1, as
per Annexure-A, is hereby quashed and set
aside.
(iii) The District Waqf Officer, Chikodi, is
hereby directed to forthwith take charge of the
management and supervision of the concerned
Wakf institution and, in exercise of the power
and duty vested in him under sub-rule (5) of
Rule 54 of the Karnataka Wakf Rules, 2017, shall
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 42 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
schedule a date for conducting a General Body
Meeting by giving wide circulation to all persons
interested in the management of the Wakf
institution.
(iv) The District Waqf Officer shall ensure
that the General Body Meeting is conducted
under his supervision and in his presence and
that the scheme is formulated strictly in
accordance with Form-42 and Rule 48 of the
Karnataka Wakf Rules, 2017.
(v) The District Waqf Officer shall thereafter
forward the newly formulated scheme to
respondent No.1-State Wakf Board for
consideration in accordance with law. The entire
exercise shall be completed within a period of
four months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
(vi) Till completion of the aforesaid
exercise, the District Waqf Officer, Chikodi, alone
shall control and supervise the management of
the Wakf institution in accordance with law,
without interference by the petitioners, the
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM
- 43 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:13086
WP No. 101523 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020031462026
members of the erstwhile committee, the ad-hoc
committee or any other person.
(vii) The District Waqf Officer shall take all
necessary steps to secure custody of the relevant
records, documents, registers, accounts and
other materials pertaining to the Wakf institution
and ensure their proper preservation.
(viii) It is made clear that this Court has
not expressed any opinion on the eligibility or
entitlement of any individual to constitute or be
appointed to the succeeding managing
committee. Such exercise shall be undertaken by
the competent authority strictly in accordance
with the applicable scheme and the Karnataka
Wakf Rules, 2017.
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
CA
CT:BCK
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 27
Digitally Signed by SACHIN
SHANKAR MAGADUM