High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Appointment Of Delhi Waqf Board's Administrator, Imposes ₹10K Costs
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of Administrator of Delhi Waqf Board with costs of Rs. 10,000. Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the plea was an absolute abuse of the process of law without giving any valid reasons as to why the appointment should be quashed. “This Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition and is inclined to...
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the appointment of Administrator of Delhi Waqf Board with costs of Rs. 10,000.
Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the plea was an absolute abuse of the process of law without giving any valid reasons as to why the appointment should be quashed.
“This Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition and is inclined to dismiss the writ petition imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- on the Petitioner to be deposited with the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks from today,” the court said.
It dismissed the plea moved by one Yamin Ali, a resident of Mehrauli, who was aggrieved by several actions taken by the Administrator of the Delhi Waqf Board.
It was Ali's case that his mother is buried in the graveyard adjacent to the historic Akhoundji Mosque, a property which he claimed is a property classified as a Waqf Property with the Delhi Waqf Board.
It was his case that some portion of the mosque was demolished under authority of the Administrator who ought to have protected it as custodian of the Delhi Waqf Board.
Ali sought the removal of the Administrator contending that he failed in his duty to protect a Waqf Property.
Rejecting the plea, the court noted that Ali had filed a similar plea raising same allegations which was withdrawn before a coordinate bench.
“The Petitioner has once again filed a Writ Petition with the very same averments and has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition,” the court said.
It added that other than stating that the actions of the Administrator were bad, no reason was given by Ali as to how the official lacked in qualification to be appointed as an Administrator of the Waqf Board. “The Petitioner has attempted to give a communal flavour to the actions of Respondent No.2,” the court noted.
It observed: “This Court does not find any reason to quash the appointment of Respondent No.2. It cannot be said that Respondent No.2 is not qualified to be appointed as an Administrator. This Writ Petition is nothing but an abuse of the process of law and is a publicity-oriented litigation.”
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Shams Khwaja, Advocate
Counsel for Respondents: Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC with Ms. Aditi Kapoor, Advs for R-1 and 2; Mr. Santosh Kumar, S.O (M.A) on behalf of R-2; Ms. Shobhana Takiar, St. Counsel, Mr. Sanjay Katyal, St. Counsel for DDA with Ms. Razia and Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advs for R-3; Mr. Yoginder Handoo and Mr. Ashwin Kataria, Advocates for R-4
Title: YAMIN ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 643