JUDGMENT By the Court.—A Wakf named as Umda Bibi Wakf No. 60 (the Wakf) Allahabad was created on 6th June, 1885. It has been registered under the different Wakf Acts and is presently registered under the Wakf Act,1995 (the Wakf Act). This Wakf has two buildings and is situated in the Chowk area of Allahabad. There are 16 shops in it. Most of these shops have been let out to different persons from the time of their predecessors-in-interest and they have been in possession for more than 50 years. The rent of these shops is very nominal in comparison to other shops of that area. Thus the income of this Waqf is very little with the result that the Mutwalli is not being given proper remunerations. Similar is the case in respect of a large number of other wakfs in the country. 2. An Association of Imams filed a case before the Supreme Court for improving their conditions. The decision in this case is All India Imam Organization v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 2086 . The Supreme Court held that it is the duty of different Waqf Boards of the States to harness their resources and to pay the persons who performed the most important and pious duty, namely of leading the community prayer in a mosque. The Supreme Court also issued guidelines to frame Scheme in this regard. 3. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court the U.P. Sunni Central Board of Wakfs (the Board) also issued certain directions on 23.1.1998 for enhancing rent of the wakf properties according to the market rate. In pursuance of this direction a Survey was done and the Survey Commissioner submitted his report on 29.10.99 for enhancing rent of the shops. Subsequently the Mutwalli issued a notice on 18.7.2000 enhancing the rent w.e.f. 1.1.1996 as mentioned in the Survey Commissioner’s Report. Later on the date of enhancement of rent was changed to 1.4.2000. Some of the tenants have paid the enhanced rent, but the petitioners have not paid the enhanced rent, though some of them have paid the rent according to the old rate. An audit was done and the auditors submitted their report on 4.2.2000 mentioning therein that the petitioners are not paying the enhanced rent. Some of the tenants have paid the enhanced rent, but the petitioners have not paid the enhanced rent, though some of them have paid the rent according to the old rate. An audit was done and the auditors submitted their report on 4.2.2000 mentioning therein that the petitioners are not paying the enhanced rent. On the basis of this audit report, recovery certificates had been issued under Section 49 of the Wakf Act,1995, hence the present writ petitions. 4. We have heard the Counsel for the petitioners, Miss Afshan Shafaut, the Counsel for Wakf (Mutwalli) and Mr. M.A. Siddiqui Counsel for the Board and Standing Counsel for the State (respondents). 5. The lease of immovable property is governed by Chapter V of the Transfer of Property Act,1882 (the T.P. Act). The U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, (the Act) came into force, in 1972 and originally the Wakf property was also governed by the Act. Section 2 of the Act provides for exemption to certain properties from operation of the Act. It was amended and clause (bbb) in sub-section (1) of Section 2 [Section 2(1)(bbb)] was inserted in 1995. It exempts any building belonging to or vested in a waqf including a wakf alal-aulad from operation of the Act It is not disputed that the property in dispute is vested in a wakf and as such the Rent Control Act is not applicable to it. Hence the rights of the parties are to be governed by Chapter V of T.P. Act. 6. It is admitted between the parties that there is no written contract between the parties and as such the lease will be governed by Section 106 of T.P. Act. The Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners never agreed to pay rent at the enhanced rate, and as such enhanced rent cannot be recovered from them. 7. It is not necessary to decide the aforesaid question at this stage. It is also not necessary at this stage to decide the question whether the rent has been reasonably enhanced or not, as the case can be decided on the other question raised by the Counsel of the petitioners. 8. 7. It is not necessary to decide the aforesaid question at this stage. It is also not necessary at this stage to decide the question whether the rent has been reasonably enhanced or not, as the case can be decided on the other question raised by the Counsel of the petitioners. 8. Section 48 of the Wakf Act provides that the Board shall examine the auditor’s report and may call for the explanation of any person in regard to any matter mentioned therein, and shall pass such orders as it thinks fit including orders for the recovery of the amount certified by the auditor under sub-section (2) of Section 47. Any person aggrieved with that order can also file an appeal before the Tribunal constituted under the Wakf Act. In this case the Board has not given any notice to the petitioners after the receipt of the auditor’s report. In view of this, the recovery is in violation of the above mandatory provision and is illegal. It is quashed. 9. The copy of the Survey Commissioner’s report dated 29.10.1999 and the Auditor’s report dated 4.2.2002 are annexed as Annexure C.A. 5. and C.A. 9 to the counter affidavit in writ petition No. 25616/03. The petitioners may file their objections against them before the Board within six weeks. The Board may decide the objections of the petitioners expeditiously, if possible, within three months from the date of receipt of the objections. Thereafter further proceedings may be undertaken. 10. Some of the petitioners have deposited some amount in pursuance of the recovery as well as in pursuance of the interim order of this Court. This amount will remain deposited and the Board while deciding objection of the petitioners will pass appropriate orders regarding this amount also. 11. We wish to make it clear that it will be open to the parties to enter into mutual settlement. In case there is no settlement, then it is also open to the Wakf to take action against the petitioners under the provisions of the T.P. Act. 12. With these observations all the writ petitions are disposed of. Order Accordingly. ———