JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.(Oral) - The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereinafter called as the ‘Act’) for setting aside impugned judgment and decree dated 28.11.2008 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar (hereinafter called as the ‘Tribunal’) vide which petitioner has been ordered to be ejected from the premises in dispute. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal. 2. The only point argued by learned counsel for the petitioner is that admittedly the present dispute is between lessor and lessee and that petitioner has been continuing in possession as tenant over the suit property under respondent –Punjab Wakf Board. Petition for ejectment was filed by the respondent before learned Tribunal for ejectment of the petitionerdefendant in which impugned order was passed for ejectment of the petitioner-defendant. However, it is contended that this fact cannot be gone into by the Tribunal constituted under the Act and hence, it is contended that the impugned judgment which has been passed by learned Tribunal is without jurisdiction and hence, liable to be set aside. He has also placed reliance upon the judgments rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Board of Wakf, West Bengal v. Anis Fatma Begum and another, [2010(6) Law Herald (SC) 4459] : 2011(1) RCR(Civil) 303 and Ramesh Gobindram v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, [2010(5) Law Herald (SC) 3697] : AIR 2010 Supreme Court 2897. 3. There is force in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner. The present case is fully covered by aforesaid judgments passed by Hon’ble Apex Court. It has been specifically held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramesh Gobindram’s case that eviction suit against tenant of Wakf property is not maintainable before the Tribunal and that the Wakf Board ought to have filed suit before civil court. The same view has been retieterated in Anis Fatima Begum’s case wherein it was observed that eviction proceedings regarding Wakf property can only be decided by civil Court and not by the Tribunal. 4. Hence, in view of aforementioned facts, the present revision petition is accepted. The impugned judgment and decree passed by learned Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar is set aside. 5. 4. Hence, in view of aforementioned facts, the present revision petition is accepted. The impugned judgment and decree passed by learned Wakf Tribunal, Amritsar is set aside. 5. However, it is made clear that this order shall not prevent the Wakf Board from instituting, if so advised, appropriate proceedings before the competent Civil Court for redress of its grievance in accordance with law. --------------