H. L. DATTU, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER in W. P. No. 6359 of 1994 claims that it is a Public Trust and is managed by Board of Trustees. The object of the Trust seems to be to secure permanence to manage and augment its resources for the benefit of the Muslim community. It appears that in the beginning of the year 1940, public-spirited muslim residents of the city had formed a social sports club by name 'islamic Club'. The main purpose of the club was to conduct lectures, dinner parties for the unity and harmony of the muslim community and these activities were held in a rented bungalow situate at Promenade Road near Coles Park. Some time later, the club members purchased a house property at Old Poor House Road. Since the place was not suitable for the club, the members of the club, with the assistance of public donations and others, purchased 'gulisthan Shadi mahal' situate at Infantry Road for a valuable consideration under a registered sale deed dated 11-7-1946 in the name of 13 Managing Committee members of Islamic Club. Petitioner-Trust further states that with their efforts and public help, they had built permanent structures and used the same for public purposes by leasing the same for marriages and other social functions for the benefit of the public for a reasonable rent, and the place is exclusively used for social functions including marriages and is never used for religious purposes or pious purposes. ( 2 ) THE State Government by a notification published in the Mysore gazette dated 27-7-1965, had notified the petitioner-Trust as a Wakf institution in exercise of its powers under Section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act. A copy of the notification is produced by the respondents along with their statement of objections. It is seen from the notification that "gulisthan Shadi Mahal Sunni" is registered as a wakf and the nature and job of the wakf is shown as marriages and social functions of the community. After publication of the notification, one of the 13 purchasers of the property in question by name 't. Mohammed Khaleel alias Zaeem', who was managing the social club had filed a suit in Original Suit No. 123 of 1966 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore, to delete Item no. After publication of the notification, one of the 13 purchasers of the property in question by name 't. Mohammed Khaleel alias Zaeem', who was managing the social club had filed a suit in Original Suit No. 123 of 1966 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge, Bangalore, to delete Item no. 230 in the notification dated 27-7-1965 and further to declare that "gulisthan Shadi Mahal" is not a wakf. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff dies on 22-10-1968 and after his death, the surviving purchasers did not pursue the proceedings and therefore the suit came to be disposed off as having abated. ( 3 ) THE petitioner claims that it is a public Trust registered on 7-2-1972 before the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Shivajinagar, Bangalore, which is long after the declaration of the institution as wakf under the wakf Act and in spite of such registration, petitioner-Trust continued to subject itself to the jurisdiction of the Karnataka Board of Wakfs in respect of various provisions, including payment of the statutory contributions, reporting of vacancies of the Trustees and approval of the Trustees etc. ( 4 ) SOME time in the month of May 1991, the President of the petitioner-Trust had filed a written complaint dated 2-5-1991 before the respondent-Board for holding an enquiry in the working of the petitioner-Trust. In pursuance thereof, the Board had issued a show-cause notice dated 3-6-1991, inter alia directing the petitioner-Trust to show cause as to why action should not be initiated against it for removal from the mutawalliship (membership of Board of Trustees) for various acts of omissions and irregularities stated in the notice itself. The notice was replied by the petitioner-Trust by its letter dated 17-6-1991. The board not being satisfied with the explanation offered, had appointed an enquiry Officer to inquire into the allegations made in the show-cause notice dated 3-6-1991. Aggrieved by the initiation of enquiry proceedings, petitioner-Trust is before this Court inter alia, seeking the following reliefs. They are:i. To direct the first respondent to delete the petitioner-Trust from the list of wakf registered under Section 5 of the Wakf act holding that the petitioner-Trust is not a wakf under the wakf Act but a 'regular public Trust'. II. To quash the enquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner-Trust as having without jurisdiction and ab initio void. They are:i. To direct the first respondent to delete the petitioner-Trust from the list of wakf registered under Section 5 of the Wakf act holding that the petitioner-Trust is not a wakf under the wakf Act but a 'regular public Trust'. II. To quash the enquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner-Trust as having without jurisdiction and ab initio void. ( 5 ) RESPONDENTS have filed their objections resisting the reliefs sought in this writ petition. In that, they firstly state that the petition is not maintainable before this Court for the reason that an alternate and effective remedy is available to the petitioner-Trust for the reliefs claimed in this writ petition. Secondly, since petitioner-Trust is declared as a 'wakf under Section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act by issuing an appropriate notification dated 27-7-1965, and that notification has not been questioned by any one within the period of one year prescribed under Section 6 of the Wakf Act, the petitioner-Trust as wakf has become final and conclusive and it is binding on all persons. Thirdly, once an Institution is declared as a wakf under the Wakf Act, the same cannot be converted into a society or a Trust subsequently inasmuch as the Institution and its properties vest with the God and the question of making a Trust does not arise. Lastly, they state that the initiation of the enquiry proceedings on a written complaint filed by one of the responsible persons of the petitioner-Trust is in accordance with law and in accordance with the provisions of Wakf Act. ( 6 ) W. P. No. 13903 of 1995. In this petition, the petitioner-Trust calls in question the correctness or otherwise of the orders made by the first respondent-Board in No. KTW/sms/3/bnu/91-92, dated 5-4-1995. By the said order, the Board, in exercise of its powers under Section 43-A of the Wakf Act, 1954, has assumed the direct management of the petitioner-Trust for a period of one year or until further orders, removing the Trustees comprised in the self-styled Board of Trust with immediate effect, and appoints an Administrator and an Advisory Committee to assist him. ( 7 ) THE relief sought in this writ petition is also opposed by the first respondent-Board by filing its statement of objections. ( 7 ) THE relief sought in this writ petition is also opposed by the first respondent-Board by filing its statement of objections. ( 8 ) SRI Yoganarasimha, the learned Counsel for petitioner-Trust contends that the Wakf Board was not entitled to include their property in the list of wakfs published under Section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act, 1954. Secondly, if a public Trust is declared as a wakf by the Board, then such action of the Board is one without jurisdiction and without authority of law and the public Trust is not bound by such a decision. Thirdly, the trust continues to be in existence in spite of a notification issued by the board and the Board has no jurisdiction to hold any enquiry into the working of the Trust and therefore, the initiation of the enquiry proceedings by the Board by issuing notice dated 3-6-1991 is wholly without jurisdiction, illegal and without authority of law. Lastly, the order made by the Board in appointing the Administrator to manage the affairs of the petitioner-Trust is in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Act. In aid of his submissions, the learned Counsel strongly relies upon the observations made by the Apex court in the case of Nawab Zain Yar Jung (since deceased) and Others v director of Endowments and Another. ( 9 ) PER contra, Sri D. L. N. Rao, learned Counsel for the respondent Board submits that the property in question is included in the list of wakfs published by the Board under Section 5 (2) of the Act and that list has become final and conclusive, since the same is not questioned by any one including the petitioner within one year specified under Section 6 of the Wakf Act, and therefore at this belated stage petitioner-Trust is not entitled to any relief much less the relief sought in these writ petitions. The learned Counsel relies upon the observations made by the Apex court in support of his thinking in the case of Sayyed Ali and Others v andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, Hyderabad and Others, Punjab Wakf board v Gram Panchayat alias Gram Sabha, Uttar Pradesh Sunni central Board of Muslim. The learned Counsel relies upon the observations made by the Apex court in support of his thinking in the case of Sayyed Ali and Others v andhra Pradesh Wakf Board, Hyderabad and Others, Punjab Wakf board v Gram Panchayat alias Gram Sabha, Uttar Pradesh Sunni central Board of Muslim. Wakfs v Mazhar Hasan , Board of Muslim wakfs, Rajasthan v Radha Kishan and Others, and the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Karnataka Board of Wakfs v Hazrath Attulla Shah Dhargah, Bangalore and Others. ( 10 ) TO appreciate the contentions of the learned Counsels, let me briefly notice the provisions of Wakf Act, 1954. The Parliament has enacted Wakf Act to provide for better administration and supervision of wakfs. "wakf' means a permanent dedication by a person professing: islam of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised, by muslim as pious, religious or charitable. Section 4 of the Act provides for preliminary survey of wakfs. Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act empowers the State Government to appoint a Commissioner of Wakfs to make a survey of wakf properties existing in the State on the date of commencement of the Act and to make a report thereon. Sub-section (3); of Section 4 of the Act provides that the Commissioner shall, after making such inquiry as he may consider necessary submit his report to the state Government containing the particulars mentioned in clauses (a) to (f ). Section 5 of the Act provides for publication of list of wakfs. Under section 5 (1) of the Act, the State Government is required upon receipt of the report made by the Commissioner to forward a copy of the same to the Wakf Board constituted under the Wakf Act. Section 5 (2) states that the Board shall examine the report submitted to it under Section 5 (1) and publish the same in the Official Gazette, a list of wakfs existing in the State at the commencement of the Act or coming into existence thereafter. Section 5 (2) states that the Board shall examine the report submitted to it under Section 5 (1) and publish the same in the Official Gazette, a list of wakfs existing in the State at the commencement of the Act or coming into existence thereafter. Section 6 of the Act provides that, if any question arises whether a particular property specified as a wakf property in the list of wakfs published under the Act is a wakf property or not, the Board or the mutawallis of the wakf or any person interested therein may institute a suit in a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for decision of the; question and the decision of the Civil Court in such matters shall be, final. It is also provided therein, that no such suit shall be entertained by a Civil Court after the expiry of one year from the date of publication, of list of wakfs under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act. Sub-section, (4) of Section 6 of the Act further provides that the list of wakfs published under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act, unless it is modified in pursuance of a decision of the Civil Court under sub-section (1), be final and conclusive. These provisions would indicate that a dispute relating to a wakf property requires to be decided in the manner provided in the wakf Act. ( 11 ) LET me now notice the law on the point: a Division Bench of this Court in Hazrath Attulla Shah Dhargah's case, supra, was pleased to hold that special rules of limitation is applicable to a suit filed by any person interested in the wakf, if any question arises whether a particular property specified as a wakf property in a list of wakfs published under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act is a -wakf property or not. ( 12 ) THE Apex Court in Sayyed Ali's case, supra, was pleased to observe, for the purpose of Section 3 (1) of the Act and to establish the ingredients of wakf, it is not necessary that dedication should be in favour of Dargah and it is sufficient if the dedication is made for the purpose recognised by the Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable. The Court was further pleased to observe that any dispute relating to character of wakf property is to be decided in the manner provided under the Wakf Act and secondly, the list of wakfs published in the official Gazette is final and conclusive except to the result of a suit that may be filed as provided under Section 6 of the Wakf Act. ( 13 ) THE Apex Court in Punjab Wakf Board's case, supra, was pleased to hold that the expression 'the Board or mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested therein' used in sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act contemplates that suit must be in connection with any dispute between the Wakf Board on the one hand and mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested in the wakf as distinct from interested in the property on the other hand. Secondly, the first proviso and the explanation appended to Section 6 (1) of the Act contemplates that if a suit is not filed within one year as required under the first proviso, the notification issued under Section 5 (2) of the Act listing the wakf property would be binding not only on those interested in the Trust but even strangers, claiming interest in the property in question, provided they were given notice of the enquiry under Section 4 of the Act preceding the notification under Section 5 (2) of the Act. If no such notice is issued, the notification would not come in the way of a Civil Court to decide the dispute if raised between the Wakf Board and a third party, even if such suit is filed beyond one year from the date of notification. ( 14 ) THE Supreme Court in the case of Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central board of Muslim Wakfs, supra, was pleased to observe that if a property is set apart for a definite purpose, such property would become 'dedicated' for a purpose. It cannot be said that it is only in cases when an individual divests himself of the property and after declaration of Trust it is binding on the settler with the object for which the property thereafter is to be held. It cannot be said that it is only in cases when an individual divests himself of the property and after declaration of Trust it is binding on the settler with the object for which the property thereafter is to be held. If out, of the monies given by public, a property is purchased for a public purpose, which is religious or charitable in character, that property will not lose the character of 'wakf as defined under the Act. ( 15 ) THE Apex Court in the case of Board of Muslim Wakfs, supra, was pleased to hold that a stranger, who is a non-muslim and is in possession of certain property, his right, title and interest therein cannot be put in jeopardy merely because the property in included in the list published under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act. The failure of such a person to institute a suit in a Civil Court of a competent jurisdiction for decision of such question, within a period of one year as provided for under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act does not make the inclusion of such property in the list of wakfs published by the Board under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act final and conclusive under sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the Act. The Apex Court was further pleased to observe that for the purpose of Section 6, the dispute requires to be confined between the Wakf Board, the mautawalli and the person interested in the wakf. The Court was further pleased to observe that the words "any person interested therein" appearing in sub-section (1) of section 6 must necessarily refer to the wakf which immediately precedes it. It cannot refer to the wakf property. The list published under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act will not bind a stranger, who is in possession of the property merely because he happens to be a person affected by the publication of the list of wakfs. ( 16 ) IT is now necessary to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Nawab Zain Yar Jung, supra, on which a strong reliance was placed by learned Counsel for petitioner-Trust. In that case, the appellants before the Apex Court were the Trustees appointed by Nizam of hyderabad by a Trust Deed dated 14-6-1954. ( 16 ) IT is now necessary to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Nawab Zain Yar Jung, supra, on which a strong reliance was placed by learned Counsel for petitioner-Trust. In that case, the appellants before the Apex Court were the Trustees appointed by Nizam of hyderabad by a Trust Deed dated 14-6-1954. The Director of Endowments and Joint Secretary, Board of Revenue, had issued a notice on the trustees calling upon them to register the aforesaid Trust deed under the Hyderabad Endowments Regulations, and to render accounts of the same from the date of its inception till the date of the notice. The Trustees had disputed the authority of the Board of Director to issue the aforesaid notice and had also urged that the Trust was not governed by the Hyderabad Endowment Regulations. Aggrieved by the said notice and the subsequent orders made by Director of Board of Revenue, the trustees were before the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The Court was pleased to dismiss the writ petition. The Trustees aggrieved by the said order had approached the Apex Court. ( 17 ) THE appellants before the Apex Court primarily had urged, that the Hyderabad Endowment Regulations and the Rules framed thereunder are ultra vires and are violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. On the other hand, the respondents had contended that the regulations and the rules framed thereunder were not co-extensive with the provisions of the Acts which had been extended to hyderabad by the Part 'b' States (Laws) Act and so, Section 6 of the Act was inapplicable to them and they also had contended that the regulations and the rules did not contravene any constitutional provisions. ( 18 ) WHEN the appeal was pending before the Apex Court, the Muslim wakf Board, Hyderabad, constituted under the provisions of the Wakf act, 1954, informed the appellants that in the opinion of the Board, the trust was a wakf within the meaning of the Wakf Act and therefore, the same requires to be registered under Section 28 of the Act. Since the trust did not take any steps to register itself under Section 28 of the act, the Board in exercise of its power under Section 28 of the Act caused the registration of the Trust and published the same in the andhra Pradesh Official Gazette, dated 12-1-1961. Since the trust did not take any steps to register itself under Section 28 of the act, the Board in exercise of its power under Section 28 of the Act caused the registration of the Trust and published the same in the andhra Pradesh Official Gazette, dated 12-1-1961. The action of the board was questioned before the Andhra Pradesh High Court on the ground that the Trust in question was not a wakf and so the provisions of the Wakf Act were inapplicable to it. ( 19 ) IN view of the aforesaid developments during the pendency of the appeals before the Apex Court, the appellants made a request to the court to consider the nature of the Trust and decide whether the registration of the Trust by the Board under Section 28 of the Act was valid or not. Before the Apex Court, it was a common ground by both the parties, that if the Trust is held to be a wakf within the meaning of the relevant provisions of the Wakf Act and its registration under Section 28 of the Act is found to be valid, the impugned regulations and the rules framed thereunder would be inapplicable to the said Trust and if on the other hand, it is held that the Trust is not a wakf and the provisions of the Wakf Act are inapplicable to it, then its registration under Section 28 of the Act would be invalid. Therefore, the main question that was before the Apex Court was whether the Trust executed by the Nizam is a wakf to which the provisions of Wakf Act would apply or is it a public charitable Trust falling outside the Wakf Act? ( 20 ) THE Apex Court after elaborate discussion of the provisions of wakf Act, 1954, and after dealing with the broad distinction between the wakf and the secular Trust of a public and religious character and after considering the covenants in the Trust executed by the Nizam on 14-6-1954. was pleased to hold that the Trust is not a wakf and does not fall within the provisions of Wakf Act, 1954, but a Secular Public Charitable trust. was pleased to hold that the Trust is not a wakf and does not fall within the provisions of Wakf Act, 1954, but a Secular Public Charitable trust. The Court while arriving at the above conclusion has observed that the purpose for which a wakf can be created must be one which is recognised by Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable, and the objects of public utility which may constitute beneficiaries under the wakf must be objects for the benefit of the Muslim community. The court was further pleased to observe that the public Trusts which do not satisfy the definition of "wakf under Section 3 (1) of the Wakf Act, 1954, would be outside the purview of the Act. ( 21 ) THE learned Counsel for petitioner Sri Yoganarasimha for petitioner-Trust, keeping in view the observations made by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision contends, that it was in the knowledge of the other side that the petitioner was a Trust and not a wakf as defined under Section 3 (1) of the Act, and if a secular comprehensive public charitable trust is construed and declared as a wakf by the Board of wakfs and then such action is one without jurisdiction and without authority of law and the Trust is not bound by such decision and the law of limitation and the procedure prescribed under Section 6 of the Wakf act is not applicable to petitioner-Trust. ( 22 ) THE fact situation in the present case is entirely different. A social Club consisting 13 members of the Managing Committee had purchased an immovable property for conducting social function such as lecture, dinner parties and for conducting marriage ceremonies of Muslim community people. The immovable property so purchased by the social Club was declared a Wakf Institution by the respondent-Karnataka wakf Board by issuing a notification under Section 5 (2) of the act dated 27-7-1965. The immovable property so purchased by the social Club was declared a Wakf Institution by the respondent-Karnataka wakf Board by issuing a notification under Section 5 (2) of the act dated 27-7-1965. This notification was in the knowledge of those persons, who had purchased the property for the purpose of social club and in fact one of the purchasers out of 13, had questioned the legality or otherwise of the notification issued by the Board in a competent Civil court and had further requested to delete petitioner-Trust from being notified as Wakf Institution and the suit came to be disposed off as abated, since the plaintiff in the suit expired and neither his legal representatives nor the other purchasers of the property were interested in prosecuting the suit. Now the question would be:"when a property is declared as a wakf by issuing a notification under Section 5 (2) of the Wakf Act, whether the petitioner-Trust could still contend that they are Public Trust and the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1954, would not be applicable to them in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of india?" ( 23 ) THE Wakf Board is entrusted with the duty of administering and supervising all wakfs within the State of Karnataka, whether created before or after the commencement of the Wakf Act. After constitution of wakf Board, the first respondent herein after receipt of the report made by the Commissioner sent by the State Government, has published a notification dated 27-7-1965, notifying the petitioner-Trust as a Wakf institution, which is primarily based on the report of the Commissioner appointed under Section 4 of the Act and the recommendation made by the State Government. Now the other aspect of the matter is, the property in question was purchased by 13 persons, who professed muslim religion. This factual aspect is not disputed nor can be disputed by any person at this stage. When this property was notified as wakf property, one of the 13 purchasers, had questioned the notification by filing appropriate civil suit within the time prescribed under Section 6 (1) of the Act. Since the person, who filed the suit expired and since no other person was interested in prosecuting the suit, the Trial Court was pleased to dispose off the suit as having abated. That order has become final. Since the person, who filed the suit expired and since no other person was interested in prosecuting the suit, the Trial Court was pleased to dispose off the suit as having abated. That order has become final. ( 24 ) SECTION 6 of the Act, as I have noticed earlier provides, that if any question arises whether a particular property specified as a wakf property in the list of wakfs published under the Act is a wakf property or not, the Board or the mutawallis of the wakf or any person interested therein may institute a suit in a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for decision of the question and the decision of the Civil Court in such matters shall be final. ( 25 ) THE notification issued by the Karnataka Board of Wakfs in exercise of its powers under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act is dated 27-7-1965. In the said notification, the name, address, and occupation of the mutawalli is shown as "executive Committee of Islamic Club". It is not in dispute, that at the relevant point of time, the Executive Committee of Islamic Club consisted of 13 persons, who are none other than the persons, who are professing Islam Religion. For the reasons best known to them, they did not choose to question the legality or otherwise of the notification issued by respondent-Board to its logical conclusion, though an half-hearted attempt was made by one of the members of the Executive committee, who was also one of the signatories to the sale deed of the property in question. Even otherwise, the expression "the person interested therein" is explained by Apex Court in two of its leading decisions on the topic, to suggest that persons interested therein used in sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act contemplates that suit must be in connection with any dispute between the Wakf Board on the one hand and mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested in the wakf, as distinct from persons interested in the property on the other hand. The 13 persons, who are the members of the Managing Committee of the 'islamic Club' are persons interested in the wakf, and they do come within the meaning of "persons interested therein" which finds a place in Section 6 (1) of the Act since they are Muslims and staunch followers of Islam Religion and they should have questioned the notification issued by the Board within the period prescribed under Section 6 (1) of the act, for the reason, the expression 'the person interested therein' which finds a place in Section 6 (1) of the Act is explained by Apex Court in board of Muslim Wakfs case, supra. In the said decision, the Court was pleased to observe:"33. The answer to these questions must turn on the true meaning and construction of the word 'therein' in the expression 'any person interested therein' appearing in sub-section (1) of Section 6. In order to understand the meaning of the word 'therein' in our view, it is necessary to refer to the preceding words 'the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf. The word 'therein' must necessarily refer to the 'wakf which immediately precedes it. It cannot refer to the 'wakf property'. Sub-section (1) of Section 6 enumerates the persons who can file suits and also the questions in respect of which such suits can be filed. In enumerating the persons who are empowered to file suits under this provision, only the Board, the mutawalli of the wakf, and 'any person interested therein', thereby necessarily meaning any person interested in the wakf, are listed. It should be borne in mind that the Act deals with wakfs, its institutions and its properties. It would, therefore, be logical and reasonable to infer that its provisions empower only those who are interested in the wakf, to institute suits". ( 26 ) IN Punjab Wakf Board's case, supra, the Court was pleased to state:"expression "the Board or the mutawalli of the wakf or any person interested therein" used in sub-section (1) of Section 6 contemplates that suit must be in connection with any dispute between the wakf or any person interested in the wakf, as distinct from '. interested in the property". interested in the property". ( 27 ) THE Court was further pleased to observe:"the first proviso and explanation to Section 6 (1) of the Act contemplates that if a suit is not filed within one year as required under the first proviso, the notification under Section 5 (2) would be binding not only on those interested in the Trust but even strangers, claiming interest in the property in question, provided they were given notice in the inquiry under Section 4 preceding the notification under Section 5 (2) of the Act". ( 28 ) AT this stage, I should recapitulate the observations made by a division Bench of this Court in the case of Hazrath Attulla Shah Dhargah, supra, wherein it is stated that persons interested would include muslims, who are entitled to be affairs of the wakf institution are also persons interested in the wakf institution, namely, working of the institution and may not be in the property of the wakf institution. ( 29 ) THE purpose of Section 6 of the Act is to confine the dispute between the Board, the mutawalli and persons interested in the wakf. Unless a suit is filed in a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction within one year of the date of publication of the list of wakfs for decision of the question whether a particular property is a wakf property or not or whether a wakf is a Shia Wakf or Sunni Wakf, the list so published would be final and conclusive between the Board, the mutawalli and the person interested in the wakf. In the instant case, the Board which is constituted under the provisions of Wakf Act had published the list of wakfs under Section 5 (2) of the Act by a notification dated 27-7-1965, and the only remedy available against the publication of the list is that the Board or the mutawalli of wakf or any person interested in the wakf is to institute a civil suit in a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction within a period of one year of the publication of the list. At this stage, it may be mentioned that the challenge to list of wakf properties under section 5 (2) of the Act, in these proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in my opinion, the same is impermissible, in view of the fact that a civil suit is maintainable to challenge the list published under Section 5 (2) of the Act. At this stage, I must also add that much before Trust could be registered, the property in question had been notified as a wakf property in the list that was published on 27-7- 1965 and therefore, neither the decision to register nor the registration of wakf as a Trust in the year 1972 cannot bind the Wakf Board. Lastly, in my view, the decision on which strong reliance was placed by the learned Counsel for petitioner-Trust would not assist him much since on the facts of that case, the Court held that the Trust created is not a wakf but a secular public Trust. ( 30 ) IN these proceedings, I do not propose to go into the question with regard to the validity or otherwise of the list of wakf properties insofar as they relate to the wakf in question as published in the Gazette, dated 27-7-1965. If it is permissible under the provisions of Wakf Act, the petitioner-Trust is at liberty to question the same in an appropriate proceedings. ( 31 ) INSOFAR as the relief requested in W. P. No. 13903 of 1995 is concerned, the same would pales into insignificance in view of my observations in writ petition filed by the petitioner-Trust in W. P. No. 6359 of 1994. ( 32 ) IN the result, the following: orderi. Writ petitions are rejected. Rule discharged. II. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner-Trust to approach the appropriate Civil Court, if they so desire, if it is permissible under law and under the provisions of the Wakf Act. III. In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs. Ordered accordingly. --- *** --- .