JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners herein are citizens of Agra and belonging to the Shia community. The petitioners claim that their forefathers are buried in the precinct of a mazar. The mazar in question is known as "Mazar Shaheed-e-Salis” which is situated at Dayal Bagh Road, Agra. The Mazar is under the management of respondent No. 5, Shia Central Board of Waqfs and the grievance of the petitioners is that the Board has granted permission for making certain constructions in that property whereby they fear that the graves of their ancestors would be damaged. This petition is, therefore, filed with the prayer to restrain the respondents from interfering, altering, alienating and dismantling the graves from the waqfs property. 3. Amongst others, the submission of Mr. Naqvi is that although the property is under the management of the respondent No. 5, Waqfs Board, the activities of the Board are regulated by the provisions of the Waqfs Act, 1995. The functions of the Board are laid down under Section 32 of the Act and though the Board is permitted to delegate some of its functions/powers in writing to any member or Secretary or any officer or servant of the Board under Section 27 of the Waqfs Act. The submission of Mr. Naqvi is that there is no such authorization and that the proposed construction is illegal. 4. The other submission of Mr. Naqvi is that as against the proposed construction which is to come up on both the sides of the mazar the development may take place in a portion in front of the mazar. There is some kind of waiting hall, which is in the ground floor construction and other constructions are in front of mazar. 5. The Board has defended the proposed construction on the ground that it is to be made for the benefit of the visitors and those who come at the time of Urs or otherwise. There should be proper accommodation and from that point of view the construction is sought to be made on both sides of mazar. It has also been stated on behalf of the respondents that none of the graves which are in the compound of the mazar will be, in any manner, disturbed or damaged. There should be proper accommodation and from that point of view the construction is sought to be made on both sides of mazar. It has also been stated on behalf of the respondents that none of the graves which are in the compound of the mazar will be, in any manner, disturbed or damaged. It is their contention that the portion in front of mazar ought to be remain as it is, and it will be better to have much space in the front. It is stated that a large number of visitors come at the time of Urs and otherwise and, therefore, it is desirable to have the construction on both sides of mazar rather than in front. 6. It is pointed out by Mr. Naqvi that in any case the authorization which is relied upon by the Board does not permit the concern member to permit such construction. In the said authorization dated 6.6.2005 it is specifically stated that it is issued under the powers of the Board under Section 27 of the Act. It is signed by one Shri S.M. Abbas Rizvi, Chief Executive Officer. It authorizes various individuals to perform necessary functions in different districts. One Shri Akhtar Rizvi was authorized for district Agra. After mentioning the names of the individuals appointed in the concerned districts authorizing thereafter states as follows, (same translated from Hindi reads): “Authorized persons are permitted to act in the particular districts with respect to the waqfs for the (i) protection, (ii) decision on disputes, (iii) supervision of the activity of mutavalli’ (iv) looking into the records of the income of the waqfs, (v) taking appropriate decision with respect to the appointment, removal and renewal of the mutavalli and (vi) taking whatever steps that are necessary in the interest of the waqfs.” 7. It is submitted by the respondent that this authorization is quite adequate and it authorizes Mr. Akhtar Rizvi to act in accordance therewith. There is also an appointment of Development Committee and in that Mr. Rizvi is a member. The Committee is authorized to act for the development and for increasing the income of the waqfs subject to the control of the Waqfs Board and as per the rules and regulations therewith. 8. Mr. Ravi Kiran Jain, Senior Advocate and Mr. M. Islam, learned Counsel for the respondents 5 and 7 respectively submitted that authorization is adequate. The Committee is authorized to act for the development and for increasing the income of the waqfs subject to the control of the Waqfs Board and as per the rules and regulations therewith. 8. Mr. Ravi Kiran Jain, Senior Advocate and Mr. M. Islam, learned Counsel for the respondents 5 and 7 respectively submitted that authorization is adequate. However, on a reading of the authorization, they have fairly made a statement to avoid any controversy that they will rather go back to the Board to get a decision from the Board regarding the proposed construction. They are also agreeable to look into the further representation that the petitioner may file. 9. In our view the authorities of the Board have responded properly to the grievance set out in this petition and they are ready and willing to look into the submissions of the petitioners. This being the internal problem of the concerned community, it will be better that the petitioners may make their representation to the respondent Board and the Board will look into it and take appropriate decision in consonance with the law, traditions and religion of the community. We may point out that the Board Consist of scholars who are well versed and competent to take necessary decision in accordance with law, religion and traditions. We expect them to do so. 10. The petitioners may make representation within two weeks. The Board may as well call the petitioners to give them personal hearing and to see to it that their grievances are looked into. It will be in the fitness of the things that the Board considers the representation regarding construction expeditiously and thereafter takes subsequent steps to authorize any particular individual to carry its orders in the event the Board decides to execute the work. Needless to say that they will approach the authorities of the Municipal Corporation or otherwise of the Development Board for further permission/sanction if required under law. 11. There has been an order of injunction. That order will continue for a period of four weeks within which time the Board will take its decision. 12. Petition is disposed of accordingly. ————