Waqf Tribunal Can’t Hear Election Dispute Over Committee Claiming To Be Mutawalli, Kerala HC Holds

The appellants challenged the Wakf Tribunal, Kozhikode’s judgments dated 25 March 2026 in WOS No. 63 of 2022 and WOS No. 29 of 2023.

The appeals concerned disputes arising from elections to the committee of Balussery Mahallu Muslim Jama-Ath, which claimed to be the mutawalli of the waqf.

The High Court heard both appeals together and considered whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate the election disputes.

The Court applied Sections 6 and 7 of the Wakf Act, 1995, concerning disputes regarding a waqf and the Tribunal’s power to determine them; Section 83, concerning the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over disputes or questions relating to a waqf or waqf property; Section 32, concerning the powers and functions of the Wakf Board; and Section 94, concerning a mutawalli’s failure to discharge duties.

Relying on Mangad Noorul Hidaya Committee v. Hamsa V., 2026 KHC Online 7584, the Court held that an election dispute does not, merely by involving a committee associated with a waqf, fall within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The Tribunal’s jurisdiction may be invoked where the question is who should be appointed mutawalli in the event of a vacancy, following the applicable statutory process, including Section 63.

The Court treated the dispute as one concerning an election to a committee claiming to be the mutawalli, rather than a matter requiring the Wakf Board to determine who should fill a vacancy in the office of mutawalli.

Applying the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Mangad Noorul Hidaya Committee, it concluded that Sections 32 and 94 did not confer Tribunal jurisdiction over the election dispute.

The dispute therefore fell outside the Tribunal’s statutory remit.

The Court dismissed the appeals, thereby declining to disturb the Tribunal’s judgments.