JUDGMENT R. Chandra, J. - This revision has been filed by the Sunni Central Board of Waqfs U. P., and Munney against the order of the Additional Munsif, Lucknow, refusing to implead the Sunni Central Board of Waqf as a party to the Suit No. 505 of 1964 Smt. Rabia Basri and another v. Munney pending in his Court. 2. Srimati Rabia Basri and Shahan Shah Hussain filed the suit for ejectment, arrears of rent and damages against Munney. It was alleged that they had purchased the disputed property under the sale-deed dated May 7, 1962 from one Abdul Razzaq Khan; that even prior to the sale the defendant occupied the premises as a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs. 2.50 Paisa, and his tenancy continued on the old terms; that the tenancy was terminated under a valid notice dated October 8, 1963. On these grounds, they claimed a decree for possession and arrears of rent. 3. The defendant admitted the factum of tenancy. He, however, pleaded that the property in dispute was waqf property, and Abdul Razzaq Khan had no authority to transfer it to the plaintiffs. 4. An application was also moved by the Secretary Waqf Board, Lucknow alleging that the property in suit was waqf property, and under Sec. 66 of the Muslim Waqfs Act, Waqf Board was a necessary party. So, it was prayed that the Board be impleaded as a party. In support of that petition, an affidavit was also filed by the Administrator of tire Waqf. The application was opposed by the plaintiffs. After hearing the parties, the Munsif disallowed the prayer. Against that order, the present revision is directed. 5. The opposite-parties failed to appear in spite of sufficient service. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. On behalf of the petitioner, great reliance has been placed on Secs. 66 and 68 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act, Sec. 66 lays down: - (1)."In every suit or proceeding relating to the title to waqf property or the right of a mutawalli, the court shall issue notice to the Board at the cost of the party instituting such suit or proceeding. .................. (3). 66 and 68 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act, Sec. 66 lays down: - (1)."In every suit or proceeding relating to the title to waqf property or the right of a mutawalli, the court shall issue notice to the Board at the cost of the party instituting such suit or proceeding. .................. (3). In the absence of a notice under sub-Sec. (1) any decree or order passed in the suit or proceeding, shall be declared void if the Board, within one month of its becoming aware of such suit or proceedings,applies to the court in this behalf..." 7. The dispute in the case related to the property which was claimed by the waqf Board, as waqf property. The plaintiffs filed the suit for possession and arrears of rent, alleging to be the absolute owners of the property, under a deed of sale executed by one Abdul Razzaq. If the property was really waqf property, the next question for consideration would be, whether mutwalli or the plaintiffs were entitled to manage and realise the rents. Sec. 68 of the Act is still wider in scope. It provides - "In any suit or proceeding in respect of a waqf or any waqf property by or against a stranger to the waqf or any other person, the Board may appear and plead as a party to the suit or proceeding." 8. When the dispute related to the property which was claimed to be waqf property, the Munsif should have allowed the Board to appear and plead as a party to the suit. The law had made a provision to that effect simply to safeguard the interests of the waqf. If after hearing the Board, the Munsif came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs were the absolute owners of the property, he could grant them a decree without any difficulty. In rejecting the prayer of the Board, he appears to have ignored the mandatory provisions of law. In the circumstances, I find it difficult to maintain the order passed by the Munsif. 9. Accordingly, the revision is allowed, and the order dated March 6, 1965 is set aside. The Munsif, is directed to permit the Board to appear and plead as a party to the suit, as contemplated under Sec. 68 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act. The Board being one of the petitioners in this Court, shall move afresh to the Munsif. Accordingly, the revision is allowed, and the order dated March 6, 1965 is set aside. The Munsif, is directed to permit the Board to appear and plead as a party to the suit, as contemplated under Sec. 68 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act. The Board being one of the petitioners in this Court, shall move afresh to the Munsif. No order is made for costs.