In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court on Friday observed that the Kerala Waqf Board's 2019 decision to declare disputed property in Munambam as a waqf was bad in law [State of Kerala v. Kerala Waqf Samrakshana Vedhi]..A Division Bench of Justices SA Dharmadhikari and Justice Syam Kumar VM made the observation while setting aside a single judge's order that had earlier quashed the State government's formation of an inquiry commission to examine the rights of around 600 families facing eviction after a property at Munambam was declared to be a waqf. The single-judge had opined that the Commission lacked legal authority to intervene in matters already adjudicated or pending under the Waqf Act, 1995, by the Kerala Waqf Board (KWB). However, the Division Bench today held that the KWB orders were issued with unreasonable delay, in violation of statutory provisions and are, consequently, non-enforceable in law..The Court, however, did not go to the extent of quashing the KWB orders as it was only concerned with the State's appeal against the quashing of its decision to set up an Inquiry Commission."The action of the KWB of declaring/ registering the subject property as a waqf property through its declarations and orders issued in September and October 2019 are bad in law on the grounds of being unreasonably delayed and having been issued in palpable violation of the provisions of the Waqf Acts 1954, 1984, and 1995 and resultantly non-enforceable. However, we restrain ourselves from issuing a formal order of quashing them, since the purpose of returning all the above findings is just to hold that the State Government is not bound by such highly belatedly issued declaration by the KWB after 7 decades (69 years)," the Court said..Pertinently, the Court held that the 1950 deed endowing the property was a gift deed, not a waqf deed."The endowment deed of 1950 never intended to create any ‘permanent dedication in favour of the Almighty God’, but was simpliciter a gift deed in favour of R5 Farooq Management and therefore could have never qualified as a ‘waqf deed’ under any of the enactments of the Waqf Act 1954, 1984, or 1995," the judgment stated..The Court also observed that the notification of the land as waqf was nothing but a land-grabbing tactic of the KWB, which has in turn affected hundreds of families occupying the land who were forced to take to the streets in protest."The manner in which the KWB has acted is nothing more than land-grabbing tactics after almost 7 decades, affecting fundamental rights, and the livelihood of hundreds of helpless citizens, who have been left with no choice, but to come down on the roads to launch protests, stage dharnas and agitations, which is what compelled the State Government to take the drastic step of setting up an IC. The brazen manner in which the KWB has acted in the case at hand shows reckless disregard of not only the provisions of the Waqf Act, but also the fundamental rights of a large number of citizens whose livelihood is dependent as bona fide purchasers and occupants on land under dispute", the Court said in its judgment..The notification notifying the property as waqf is ultra vires the provisions of Waqf Act ... and nothing less than a land-grabbing tactic which has affected the bread and butter, livelihood of hundreds of families ...Kerala High Court.It, therefore, declared that the State is not bound by the waqf declaration orders of the KWB in this matter. "Whilst affirming the validity of the notification constituting the IC, we shall also be holding that the State Government is not bound by the waqf declaration/ registration effected by KWB, being simply an eye wash to paint the subject property as a waqf property and Govt. possess widely conferred statutory powers to issue directions under Section 97 of the Waqf Act, 1995 post the conclusion of and submission of the report by the IC (inquiry commission) under challenge," the judgment stated..The endowment deed of 1950 never intended to create any ‘permanent dedication in favour of the Almighty God’, but was a gift deed ... therefore could have never qualified as a ‘waqf deed’ ...Kerala High Court.The dispute concerns land in Munambam, which originally measured 404.76 acres but has been reduced to around 135.11 acres due to sea erosion.In 1950, the land was gifted to the Farook College by one Siddique Sait. However, the land was already home to several people, who continued occupying the land, leading to legal battles between the college and the long-time occupants.Later, the college sold portions of the land to these occupants. These land sales failed to mention that the property was waqf land.In 2019, the Kerala Waqf Board formally registered the land as waqf property, making the earlier sales void. This triggered opposition from residents who faced eviction.An appeal challenging the State Waqf Board's decision to classify the Munambam land as a waqf was filed before a waqf tribunal in Kozhikode.Meanwhile, in response to growing protests from around 600 families, the Kerala government appointed an inquiry commission in November 2024, led by retired Justice CN Ramachandran Nair to recommend solutions.This came to be challenged before the High Court by members of the Waqf Samrakshana Samithi, who argued the government had no power to inquire into Waqf properties outside the statute.On March 17, single-judge Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas quashed the order appointing the Commission, prompting the State to file the present appeal..The State argued that the petitioners lacked locus standi and that the order was passed without a proper appreciation of law and facts. It also argued that the deed endowing the land to the Farooq management was a gift deed, not a waqf deed.The Division Bench today concurred with the State on this aspect, stating, "The original writ petitioners do not possess the locus standi to have instituted the writ petition before the Single Bench, which clearly ought not to have been entertained at their instance.".It, therefore, set aside the single bench ruling stating that the property ought not to have been declared waqf and that the KWB's declaration in this regard does not bar the State from constituting the Inquiry Commission."For want of compliance with mandatory procedure and provisions of the Waqf Act, 1954 and 1995, especially the carrying out of a survey, the conducting of quasi-judicial inquiry, followed by a reasoned comprehensive report being forwarded to the State Government and for want of publication in the official gazette clearly, the subject property could never have been classified as a waqf property and it cannot bind the State Government restraining it from constituting any IC for conducting inquiry and submitting a report," the Court said. .The State government was represented by Advocate General (AG) and Senior Advocate K Gopalakrishna Kurup, Special Government Pleader (GP) Revenue MH Hanil Kumar, Senior GPs S Kannan and V Manu and Special GP to the AG, CE Unnikrishnan.The State Waqf Board was represented by advocate Ja,sheed Hafiz.The other respondents (Original Petitioners) were represented by advocates P Chandrasekhar, PK Ibrahim, KP Ambika, Zeenath PK, Jabeena KM, Anaz Bin Ibrahim, and Pradeep Kumar..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
