Wakf Board Cannot Decide Disputes Relating To Right To Offer Worship In Mosque: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

There is no doubt that generally, every Mohammedan is entitled to enter a Mosque dedicated to God, observed Kerala High Court while considering a writ petition filed by a man who was removed from the membership of the Jamaath.

The bench comprising Justices K. Vinod Chandran and TR Ravi noted that the Section 32 of the Act does not confer any power on the Waqf Board to decide on the question of entitlement of a person to be a member of a Jamaath and the contention that he has a right to offer worship in a Mosque will have to be considered in a properly instituted civil suit. The Tribunal constituted under the Waqf Act has powers to deal with any disputes relating to Waqf, we are of the considered opinion that such disputes should necessarily be determined in an adjudicatory process before the Waqf Tribunal, it said.

Najeem, in his writ petition, had sought a direction to the wakf board to look into his complaint against his removal from the Jamaath and to restore his membership. He contended that under Section 32 of the Waqf Act, the Wakf Board has a duty to consider and pass orders on the complaint filed by him. It further observed:

"There is no doubt that generally, every Mohammedan is entitled to enter a Mosque dedicated to God. This Court in the decision in Pathanamthitta Majillissae Islamiya v. Shaik Mohammed reported in [AIR 1963 Kerala 49] has held that the right to offer prayers in a Mosque is a legal right for the disturbance for which a Muslim is entitled to seek relief in a court of law. The above decision has been cited with approval by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the decision in Shah Abdu Bagi and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in [AIR 1988 Allahabad 1]. As such, there can be no doubt regarding the proposition that the petitioner is entitled to approach a court of law if there is a disturbance to his legal right of offering prayers in a Mosque. It would be then open to the said court of law to consider whether the disturbance is legally justifiable."

Dismissing the writ petition, the bench said that it would not prejudice his right  to approach the Waqf Tribunal for appropriate reliefs.

Case name: NAJEEM vs. KERALA STATE WAQF BOARD

Case no.: WP(C).No.18703 OF 2020

Coram: Justices K. Vinod Chandran and TR Ravi

Counsel: Advocates MANU RAMACHANDRAN, .T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY 

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment