Any Land Declared As Masjid, Graveyard In Revenue Records Must Be Protected As Waqf Even If Unused By Muslims For Long : Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that any entry in the revenue records declaring the land as "Takia, graveyard and Maszid" is required to be protected even if the same is not used by Muslim community from a long time.

The Court rejected the plea filed by a Gram Panchayat challenging the decision of a Waqf Tribunal whereby the Tribunal declared a land as waqf property and restrained the Gram Panchayat from disturbing its possession.  

Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "...any entry in the revenue records declaring the land as Takia, graveyard and Maszid, enjoys conclusivity, and, is required to be ensured to be protected even at the site concerned, despite evidence of purported prolonged non-user thereof by the Muslim community."

The Court noted that admittedly the disputed land was donated by Maharaja Kapurthala and declared as "Takia, graveyard and the Maszid" to Nikke Sha, Slamat Sha sons of Sube Shah on 14 Katak in 1922.

The Sha brothers migrated to Pakistan after partition and subsequently, the land was mutated in the name of the Gram Panchayat.

However, after partition a re-survey was conducted in the year 1966, and the apposite Misl Haqiat was prepared wherebys in the ownership column the State was declared to be the owner, whereas, in the relevant classification column the property was described as Maszid, graveyard and Takia. of the Gram Panchayat.

Considering the revenue entry, the disputed property as "Gair Mumkin Maszid, Takia as well as graveyard", the  Wakf Tribunal, declared the land as Waqf property.

The bench relied on Syed Mohd. Salie Labbai (dead) by LRs and others V. Mohd. Hanifa (dead) by LRs and others,, 1968 wherein the Apex Court held that, "once a Kabarstan has been held to be a public graveyard then it vests in the public and constitutes a wakf and it cannot be divested by non-user but will always continue to be so whether it is used or not."

The Court also rejected the Gram Panchayat's argument that the Waqf Tribunal was not entitled to adjudicate the declaration suit and pass the impugned order.

"...the entry of Shamilat Deh (common land used for village benefit) as exists in the relevant revenue records, is of the least legal significance, nor does it erode the conclusivity of truth, as becomes assigned to the entry of Takia, graveyard and Maszid, nor the jurisdictional competence to try the lis, is vested in the statutory authorities, contemplated in the Punjab Act, rather the jurisdictional competence to try the lis, solitarily vests in the Punjab Wakf Tribunal," opined the bench.

Speaking for the bench Justice Sureshwar Thakur said that, the entry in the classification column of the relevant revenue entry (referring land as Graveyard and Masjid), enjoys precedence over the entry in the revenue records describing the disputed lands as Shamlat Deh (common land used for village benefit).

In the light of the above, the Court held that the decision of Waqf Tribunal to declare the land as Waqf property and passing the injunction order restraining the Gram Panchayat is valid and within the purview of the law.

Mr. Satinder Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. G.N. Malik, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Title: GRAM PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE BUDHO PUNDHER v. PUNJAB WAKF BOARD AND OTHERS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 365

Click here to read/download the order