Judgment :- Petitioner seeks Writ of Certiorari to quash the orders of the 1st Respondent dated 012. 2003. 2. The issue relates to conduct of election of Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. The dispute relates to conduct of election whether by secret ballot or by raising of hands. 3. There has been a scheme decree passed by the Sub-Court, Tuticorin in O.S.No.57/1951 for the management of Periapalli Vasal at Sankarankovil. Executive Committee has been functioning from 1973. Muslim members of 18 years and above of the Muslim community in Sankarankovil area will constitute the voters to the General Body of the Committee. These members shall be the electorate to elect from among themselves the members of the Managing Committee. 4. Hitherto the election was conducted to the Committee by raising of hands under the supervision and direction of the President of the Committee. Successful candidate was to be announced by the President then and there and this was in vogue for more than three decades. 5. First Petitioner in the Writ Petition was elected as President of the Executive Committee for the first time during 1993. Thereafter, first Petitioner continued to be the President of the Committee. .6. Third Respondent who is the resident of Sankarankovil and also one of the members of Muslim Committee of Sunnath Jamath of Sankarankovil sent a complaint dated 13. 2003 bringing it to the notice of the first Respondent – Wakf Board about the illegal functioning of the Committee. Third Respondent had made out certain allegations against the first Petitioner – President of the Committee and that he has mismanaged and misappropriated the funds of the Committee and was functioning in an undemocratic manner. 7. Based on the above objection, a report was called for from the Wakf Inspector, Tenkasi who submitted his report dated 15. 2003. In his report, Wakf Inspector has stated that the selection of the Committee for the Walf is done by raising of hands and it has to be changed by secret ballot system. Wakf Inspector pointed out that the Committee does not submit the accounts as per bye-laws of the scheme and first Petitioner – President has collected huge amount from the Jamath and no proper accounts were shown. 8. By considering the report of Wakf Inspector, first Respondent – Wakf Board passed the impugned order dated 012. Wakf Inspector pointed out that the Committee does not submit the accounts as per bye-laws of the scheme and first Petitioner – President has collected huge amount from the Jamath and no proper accounts were shown. 8. By considering the report of Wakf Inspector, first Respondent – Wakf Board passed the impugned order dated 012. 2003 by resolving that the election for the Executive Committee shall be by secret ballot system which is challenged in this Writ Petition. After filing of the Writ Petition, third Respondent was impleaded. 9. Challenging the impugned order, the learned counsel for the Petitioner firstly contended that the President / first Petitioner was not heard before passing the order dated 012. 2003. 10. Insofar as, the first contention is concerned, a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the first Petitioner was given notice of enquiry and that first Petitioner had also sent his written objection. The impugned order refers to the written objection of the first Petitioner wherein he has denied the allegations levelled against him. In his objection, first Petitioner has also stated that as per the scheme decree, election of the office bearers has to be made only by raising of hands. When the first Petitioner had sent written objection, he is not right in contending that he was not afforded an opportunity. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the Respondents, it comes to be known that number of hearings were conducted by the first Respondent. Out of which three hearings were attended by the President, Joint Secretary and their Advocates. In such circumstances, the question of non-servicing of notice or violation of principles of natural justice does not merit acceptance. .11. Second contention of the Petitioner is that they are governed by scheme decree in O.S.No.57/1951. According to the Petitioner as per the scheme decree, election of the office bearers has to be made by raise of hands and the relief sought for, a different mode of election cannot be granted unless the scheme decree is amended in accordance with law. 12. Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the 3rd Respondent submitted that as per Sec.32 of Wakfs Act, the duty of the Board is to supervise the Jamath and the impugned order is unassailable. 12. Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the 3rd Respondent submitted that as per Sec.32 of Wakfs Act, the duty of the Board is to supervise the Jamath and the impugned order is unassailable. It was further submitted that inspite of notice sent, the Petitioner was not present and therefore, Petitioner cannot complain of violation of principles of natural justice. 13. Supporting the impugned order, Mr. V. Lakshminarayanan, learned counsel for the Wakf Board submitted that Wakf Board was not a party in O.S.No.57/1951 and the decree in the said suit is not a scheme decree. It was further submitted that there is nothing to show that the decree in O.S.No.57/1951 was obtained after compliance of provision of Sec.92 CPC. Learned counsel would further submit that serious allegations were levelled against the Jamath Executive that the accounts were not properly maintained and that there was no proper conduct of election. The impugned order was passed to conduct election by secret ballot and the impugned order is well in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 14. Placing reliance upon 1998 1 LW 134 [Syed Moinuddin v. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board], learned counsel for the Wakf Board contended that the decree in O.S.No.57/1951 is not a scheme decree as it does not provide for any relief as mentioned in Sec.92 CPC and therefore, the power of Wakf Board is not taken away by the decree. Learned counsel further submitted that there is nothing to show that sanction of Advocate-General was obtained and therefore, the decree in O.S.No.57/1951 cannot be considered as falling within the purview of Sec.92 CPC. 15. The arguments of the Writ Petitioner is that O.S.No.57/1951 was a suit under Sec.92 CPC and the terms of the decree would clearly indicate that it was a scheme decree under Sec.92 CPC. .16. Having regard to the limited scope involved in this Writ Petition, I do not propose to go into the nature of decree – whether it is a scheme decree or not. Suffice it to note that in O.S.No.57/1951, Wakf Board was not made as party. Of course, in the decree in O.S.No.57/1951, it is stated that the election shall be conducted by the Secretary under the control and direction of the President and voting shall be by show of hands by the constituents assembled in the General Body. 117. Suffice it to note that in O.S.No.57/1951, Wakf Board was not made as party. Of course, in the decree in O.S.No.57/1951, it is stated that the election shall be conducted by the Secretary under the control and direction of the President and voting shall be by show of hands by the constituents assembled in the General Body. 117. As is seen from the extract of Suit Register in O.S.No.57/1951, as against the Judgment and Decree, appeal was filed before the High Court in A.S.No.790/1954 and A.S.No.33/1957 (against the decree in O.S.No.225/1956) [the suit numbers appears to be different because of the transfer of the suit from one court to another]. As per the terms of the decree in O.S.No.57/1951, conduct of election must by show of hands. In A.S.No.33/1957 (dated 19. 1960) in modification of the decree of the lower Court, it was held that the Management and Accounts would be subject to a valid orders of Wakf Board. Modification of the decree in O.S.No.57/1951 reads as under:- "if there are valid orders of wakf board under Central Act 29/54 of any correct order which the I defendant is liable to account for his Management, the holding of this office by him as a number of the Managing committee shall be subject to such proper accounting" be added as clause 2 (d) in the lower court decree that the scheme framed of the lower court in other respects be confirmed." The above modification in the decree would make it clear that functioning and maintenance of accounts by the Jamath is subject to valid orders passed by the Wakf Board. 18. Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the 3rd Respondent submitted that Sec.32 of Wakfs Act governs Wakf including a Wakf in relation to which any scheme has been made by any Court of law, whether before or after the commencement of the Act. Sec.32 of Wakfs Act reads as under:- 32. Powers and function of the Board. 18. Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the 3rd Respondent submitted that Sec.32 of Wakfs Act governs Wakf including a Wakf in relation to which any scheme has been made by any Court of law, whether before or after the commencement of the Act. Sec.32 of Wakfs Act reads as under:- 32. Powers and function of the Board. (1) Subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, the general superintendence of all wakfs in a State shall vest in the Board established in the State; and it shall be the duty of the Board so to exercise its powers under this Act as to ensure that the wakfs under its superintendence are properly maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is duly applied to the objects and for the purposes for which such wakfs were created or intended: Provided that in exercising its powers under this Act in respect of any wakf, the Board shall act in conformity with the directions of the wakf, the purposes of the wakf and any usage or custom of the wakf sanctioned by the school of Muslim law to which the wakf belongs. 19. Supervisory powers and functions of Wakf Board includes a Wakf in relation to which any scheme has been framed by any Court of law. There is no force in the contention that conduct of election by secret ballot would be a variation from the scheme decree in O.S.No.57/1951 and that the decree has to be amended. .20. It was submitted that Clause (g) of the bye-laws of the Committee gives a direction to the Committee to carry out the directions of the Wakf Board reads as under:- ."(g) The President and Vice-President are bound to carry out the directions of the Wakf Board and other lawful duties under any law and equity in force." 21. Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Rules 1997 states that voting should be by secret ballot. Exercising its supervisory jurisdiction, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board has issued direction for conduct of the election by secret ballot and the same cannot be challenged. 22. On receipt of complaint from the 3rd Respondent, report was called for from the Wakf Inspector. Tamil Nadu Wakf Board Rules 1997 states that voting should be by secret ballot. Exercising its supervisory jurisdiction, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board has issued direction for conduct of the election by secret ballot and the same cannot be challenged. 22. On receipt of complaint from the 3rd Respondent, report was called for from the Wakf Inspector. In his report Wakf Inspector has stated that the Committee does not submit the accounts as per the bye-laws of the scheme and that huge amount was collected from the Jamatdars and the same was unaccounted for. Based upon the report of the Wakf Inspector, after affording opportunity to the parties, Wakf Board has passed the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any procedural infirmity warranting interference. .23. Mr. N.G.R.Prasad, learned counsel for the 3rd Respondent submitted that Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath is having vast extent of properties and that there has to be proper conduct of election by appointing Election Observer. In the interest of Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath and having regard to the submissions, Mr.Justice S.M. Abdul Wahab, (Retired) Judge, High Court, Madras is appointed as Election Observer to supervise and conduct of election by secret ballot for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. 24. In the result, the impugned order is unassailable and the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:- "Honble Mr. Justice S.M. Abdul Wahab (retired) Judge, High Court, Madras, residing at Plot No.2870, Y Block, III Street, 12th Main road, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600 040, (Tel:044-26266694) is appointed as Election Observer to supervise and conduct of the election by secret ballot for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. " Mr.M.Nagoor Mastan B.A.B.T., (Retired Teacher) s/o Mathar Mydeen, No.81/4 A, Kayithey Milath 3rd Street, Sankarankovil and Mr.D.Bhuari, S/o.duvan Rowther, No.21, Kayithy Milath 5th Street, Sankarankovil , are nominated to assist the Election Observer in conduct of the election for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. "Election Observer shall finalize the voters list within a period of two months from the date of receipt of Commissioners Warrant. "Thereafter, Election Observer shall supervise and conduct the election by secret ballot by issuing proper notification for filing of nomination and withdrawal of nomination and conduct the election for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. "Election Observer shall finalize the voters list within a period of two months from the date of receipt of Commissioners Warrant. "Thereafter, Election Observer shall supervise and conduct the election by secret ballot by issuing proper notification for filing of nomination and withdrawal of nomination and conduct the election for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee. "Election Observer shall complete the conduct of election for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. "Remuneration of Rs. One lakh is payable to the Election Observer by Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath. "Apart from remuneration, Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath shall also bear the conveyance and other incidental expenses borne by the Election Observer towards the conduct of election by secret ballot. "All parties concerned/members of Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath are directed to cooperate with the Election Observer in preparation of voters list and also in the process of conduct of election by secret ballot for Sankarankovil Muslim Jamath Executive Committee . "If necessary, the Election Observer is also at liberty to secure police protection for the conduct of election. "On such request being made by the Election Observer, the concerned Police shall render all protection for the due conduct of election. "The office shall immediately send the copy of the order to Mr.Justice S.M.Abdul Wahab (Retired). No costs.