JUDGMENT S.D. Agarwal, J. - This first appeal has been filed against the judgment of the Civil Judge, Philibhit, dated 2-6-1976 in suit No. 91 of 1973. The issue No. 5 was framed in the suit as follows : - "Whether the suit is barred by S. 92, C.P.C. and S. 64 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act 1960 as alleged in the written statement paragraph : 3 ?" The civil Judge has come to the conclusion : that since the plaintiffs have not obtained the consent in writing of the Board the suit is barred by S. 64 of the U.P. Muslim Waqfs Act, 1960 (U.P. Act 16 of 1960) hereinafter referred to as the Act. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the suit related to a private waqf and as such the view taken by the Civil Judge that the suit is barred by S. 64 of the Act is a view manifestly erroneous. Learned counsel for the respondents hits urged that S. 64 of the Act applies both to public and private waqfs and as such the suit is clearly barred by S. 64 of the Act. 3. Section 64 of the Act which is relevant for the decision of this appeal is quoted below. "64(1). A suit to obtain any of the reliefs mentioned in S. 14 of the Religious Endowments Act, 1863, (Act XX of 1863) and in S. 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908) relating to any waqf may notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in those Acts, be instituted by the Board without obtaining the leave or consent referred to in those Acts. (2) No suit to obtain any of the reliefs referred to in sub-section (1) relating to a waqf shall be instituted by any person or authority other than the Board without the consent in writing of the Board (and where the Board has given such consent it shall not be necessary further to obtain the leave or consent referred to in the said Acts.) 4. From the reading of the above section it is clear that if reliefs are sought in relation to any waqf as provided in S. 14 of the Religious Endowments Act, 1863 and S. 92 of the Civil P. C. then such a suit can either be filed by the Board or if any person or authority other than the Board, wants to file a suit then the consent in writing of the Board has to be obtained before filing the suit. 5. In this section two expressions are very significant, namely, any of the reliefs and any waqf. From S. 14 of the Religious Endowments Act 1863, it is clear that the reliefs mentioned in S. 14 are in regard to misfeasance, breach of trust or neglect of duty, committed by such trustee, manager, superintendent or member of such committee in respect of the trust vested in, or confined to them respectively. 6. In S. 92 of the Civil P. C. the reliefs have been mentioned in Cls. (a) to (h) which are quoted below. "(a) removing any trustee; (b) appointing a new trustee; (c) vesting any property in a trustee; (cc) directing a trustee, who has been removed or a person who has ceased to be a trustee, to deliver possession of any trust property in his possession to the person entitled to the possession of such property; (d) directing accounts and enquiries ; (e) declaring what proportion of the trust . property or of the interest therein shall be allocated to any particular object of the trust; (f) authorising the whole or any part of the trust property to be let, sold, mortgaged or exchanged : (g) setting a scheme; or (h) granting such further or other relief as the nature of the case may require." The word "waqf" has been defined in S. 3(11) of the Act as follows : "Waqf" means the permanent dedication or grant of any property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim law or usage as religious, pious or charitable and includes waqfs alalaulad (to the extent to which the property is dedicated or granted for any such purpose as aforesaid) and waqfs by user, and, "Waqf" means the person who makes such dedication or grant." From the definition of the word "waqf quoted above it is clear that both public and private waqfs are contemplated within the definition of the word "waqf". In view of the above the position is that both in respect of public and private waqfs if a suit is filed for any of the reliefs mentioned in S. 14 of the Religious Endowments Act and S. 92 of the Civil P. C. which I have quoted above then such a suit is not maintainable by any person or authority other than the Board unless the consent of the Board in writing has been obtained. If, however, the Board wants to file a suit in respect of the reliefs mentioned above then) of course, it can file a suit directly. No restriction has been placed on the power of the Board to file a suit for the reliefs mentioned above. 7. The view that S. 64 applies both to public and private waqfs further finds support from other provisions of the Act which will discuss hereinafter. I have already quoted the definition of the word "waqf" which includes both public and private waqfs. S. 19 lays down the functions of the Board. The entire general superintendence of all waqfs has vested in the Board and the Board has been empowered to do all things reasonable, or necessary to ensure that the waqfs under its superintendence are properly maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is duly appropriated to the purposes for which they were founded or for which they exist. This section applies to both public or private waqfs. This section applies to both public or private waqfs. Under S. 29 it has been made obligatory on the part of the Mutawalli to get the waqf registered in the office of the Board. S. 30 of the Act directs that the Board shall maintain a register of waqfs which shall contain in respect of each waqf, particulars mentioned in the said section. Section 48 authorises the Board where there is a vacancy in the office of the Mutwalli of a waqf to appoint any person to act as Mutwalli for such period and on such conditions as it thinks fit. S. 55 of the Act further empowers the Board to remove a Mutwalli on certain conditions laid down in the said section. Sections 29, 30, 48 and 55 of the Act applies to both public and private waqfs. 8. The various sections of the Act are consequently indicative of the legislative intent that a waqf whether it is private or public would come under the superintendence of the Board as provided under the Act. Keeping in view the fact that both public and private waqfs were to come under the general superintendence of the Board, it is clear that S. 64 of the Act was enacted by the Legislature bringing within its purview both public and private waqfs. 9. It has been argued at length that S. 92 C.P.C. applies only to public trusts and as such S. 64 of the Act should also be construed as applicable to public waqfs only. I do not agree with this submission. Reference of S. 92 C.P.C. in section 64 of the Act has been made only in respect of the reliefs mentioned in S. 92 C.P.C. and not to the entire provisions of the section. 10. I am consequently of the opinion that both in respect of public and private waqfs if a suit is sought to be filed in respect of the reliefs contained in S. 14 of the Religious Endowments Act and S. 92 of the Civil P. C. by any person or authority consent in writing of the Board before filing a suit is required. If such a consent is not taken then the suit is not maintainable. 11. In the instant case it is not disputed that the consent for filing the suit was not obtained. If such a consent is not taken then the suit is not maintainable. 11. In the instant case it is not disputed that the consent for filing the suit was not obtained. In the circumstances the suit was barred by S. 64 of the Act. The view taken by the court below is consequently in accordance with law and no interference is called for. 12. I may, however, make it clear that even if now the plaintiffs want to file a suit for the reliefs sought for in the suit, it is open to them to file the suit after taking the consent in writing of the Board. 13. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Parties shall bear their own costs.