Patna HC Records Waqf CEO’s Six-Month Undertaking To Finalise Kachi-Pakki Dargah Encroachment Proceedings

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the requested writ relief concerning the alleged encroachments, jamabandi, and alleged misuse of Dargah funds.

The court held

The writ petition was disposed of.

It also directed

The Court took on record the Board’s stated position and its counsel’s submission regarding finalisation of the proceedings within six months; it further stated that the district authorities—respondents nos. 7–9—shall assist the Board if approached for removal of encroachments.

The judgment did not grant the other substantive reliefs sought or adjudicate the underlying property and financial allegations.

01Facts

The petitioner sought directions concerning alleged encroachments on land associated with Kachi Dargah-Pakki Dargah, recorded as Gairmazura Aam Kabristan; cancellation of a jamabandi; action on a report recommending such cancellation; and legal action against respondent no. 10 for alleged defalcation and misuse of Dargah funds.

p. 2

The respondents questioned the petitioner’s locus standi to maintain the petition as a public-interest litigation.

p. 2

The Sunni Waqf Board stated that its Chief Executive Officer had issued notices dated 11 September 2026 to alleged unauthorised occupants and initiated proceedings under Section 54 of the Act; the occupants disputed the Board’s claim and asserted title.

pp. 2–4

The Board’s counsel submitted that the proceedings would be finalised within six months.

p. 4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the requested writ relief concerning the alleged encroachments, jamabandi, and alleged misuse of Dargah funds.

p. 2

ii.2. Whether the pending proceedings before the Waqf Board, together with the district administration’s assistance, provided a basis to dispose of the petition.

pp. 3–5

03Law Applied

The judgment records the respondents’ reliance on Section 54 of the Waqf Act, 1995: according to the Board’s affidavit, after inquiry and hearing the parties, if the Chief Executive Officer concludes that encroachment has occurred, the matter is to be referred to the Waqf Tribunal for an eviction order.

pp. 3–4

The judgment does not cite or apply any precedent, nor does it decide the legal merits of the petitioner’s claims or the locus objection.

Provisions in the judgment · 1

Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 Section 54

04Reasoning

The Court did not determine whether the land was Waqf property, whether the occupants were encroachers, or whether the jamabandi should be cancelled.

Instead, it recorded the Board’s position that proceedings had already commenced and its counsel’s submission that those proceedings would be finalised within six months.

p. 4

The Court also stated that, if approached by the Board, the district authorities were to provide necessary support and assistance for removal of encroachments.

pp. 4–5

The locus objection was not resolved in the judgment.