Judgment : 1 Admit, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties taken up for hearing forthwith and heard. 2 The revisionary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure is invoked against the order dated 16/7/2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Maharashtra State Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad by which order the order dated 22/5/2009 and the consequent elections dated 31/5/2009 were quashed and set aside, and the appointment of the Applicants herein who were the Respondent Nos.3 to 11 as Mutawalli of Tembhi Naka Muslim Jamat Masjid, Thane was also set aside and the said Respondents were directed to pay Rs.1000/-each to each of the Applicants by way of costs. 3 The issue as regards the election of the Applicants herein as Mutawallis has had a chequered history. The Respondent Nos.1 to 8 herein filed Application No.29 of 2009 before the Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad questioning the order dated 22/5/2009 by which order the Wakf Board had directed the elections to be held to the Wakf in question. The said Application filed by the Respondent Nos.1 to 8 herein was rejected by the Wakf Tribunal by the judgment and order dated 5/9/2009. This resulted in Civil Revision Application No.168 of 2009 being filed by the Respondent Nos.1 to 8 herein in this Court. By order dated 20/4/2010 this Court set aside the order passed by the Wakf Tribunal dated 5/9/2009 and the matter was remanded back to the Wakf Tribunal for a de-novo consideration of the Application No.29 of 2009. On such remand, the Wakf Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 26/7/2010 allowed the said Application and thereby set aside the order dated 22/5/2009 as also set aside the elections of the Applicants herein which were held consequent thereto. The said order dated 26/7/2010 was challenged by the Applicants herein by filing Civil Revision Application No.499 of 2010. This Court by order dated 5/4/2011 set aside the order dated 26/7/2010 on the ground that the issue of election of the Applicants herein was not a issue before the Wakf Tribunal, and the only issue before the Tribunal was the legality and validity of the order dated 22/5/2009, and therefore, the Tribunal without there being any challenge to the elections could not have set aside the said elections. This Court therefore remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for de-novo consideration, and whilst so remanding, this Court also permitted the Respondent Nos.1 to 8 herein to amend the said Application No.29 of 2009 so as to incorporate a challenge to the election of the Applicants herein, and consequently the order dated 3/7/2009 by which order approval to the said elections was given by the Chief Executive Officer. It seems that pursuant to the said order dated 5/4/2011 passed by this Court in Civil Revision Application No.499 of 2010 that the Applicants amended the Application No.29 of 2009 so as to incorporate the averments in respect of the challenge to the order dated 3/7/2009 and thereby challenged the elections of the Applicants herein. 4 After the remand the Tribunal directed that the notices be issued to the Respondents to the said Application i.e. the Applicants herein. The notices were accordingly issued. The Tribunal proceeded to hear the said Application by observing that since the addresses mentioned in the notices are the same as mentioned in the Application and since no change of address has been communicated, the absence of the Respondents seems to be deliberate and perhaps with some sinister design to abuse the process of law again and again and probably they might have lost the interest. The Tribunal further observed that the notices are returned unserved on false ground. The Tribunal after so observing in respect of the service on the Respondents proceeded to consider the matter on merits, and on the basis of the material on record reached a conclusion that the appointment of the Respondent Nos.3 to 11 in the said Application seems to be result of an unfair and mock election and cannot be held to be fair and by following due process of law. The Tribunal further went on to observe as follows:- “I can not restrain myself from expressing the acute anguish that the Regional Wakf Officer and the Ld. CEO both have made mockery of the most respected democratic process which is working successfully since last 60 years in the whole nation.” The Tribunal therefore reached a conclusion that the Respondents have been elected by a process which has been manipulated and sacrificed at the altar of self pride and interest of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11. CEO both have made mockery of the most respected democratic process which is working successfully since last 60 years in the whole nation.” The Tribunal therefore reached a conclusion that the Respondents have been elected by a process which has been manipulated and sacrificed at the altar of self pride and interest of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11. The Tribunal further observed that the Respondents who got elected through such a suspicious mode cannot be said to be validly elected members and cannot constitute panel of management of a most pious and religious institution. The Tribunal therefore set aside the order dated 22/5/2009, the order dated 3/7/2009 as also the elections of the Applicants herein who wee the Respondent Nos.3 to 11. It would be relevant to reproduce the operative part of the order of the Tribunal:- “1] Application No.29/2009 is hereby allowed. 2] The order dated 22.5.09 and the consequent elections dated 31-5-2009 held pursuant thereto both are quashed and set aside. 3] The impugned order dated 3-0-9 being illegal is also set aside. 4] The appointment of respondents Nos.3 to 11 as Mutwalli of Tembhi Naka Muslim Jamat Masjid, Thane is also set aside. 5] However for the reasons stated above the Wakf Board is directed to immediately frame the scheme and then hold fresh elections if provided by scheme and appoint the mutwalli according to law. It is at liberty to make interim arrangement according to law. The Board shall complete this exercise within 6 months hereof. 6] The Respondents Nos.3 to 11 shall pay Rs.1000/-each to each of the applicants by way of costs and bear their own. The Respondent No.1 & 2 shall bear their own costs.” As indicated above, it is the said order dated 16/7/2011 which is impugned in the above Civil Revision Application. 5 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The principal contention of the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants Shri Warunjikar is that the impugned order has been passed without hearing the Applicants herein. The learned counsel would contend that the order ex-facie discloses that the service on the Applicants herein i.e. the Respondents in the Application was not complete and the Tribunal on a premise that the Respondents are avoiding service has proceeded to consider the matter on merits. The learned counsel would contend that the order ex-facie discloses that the service on the Applicants herein i.e. the Respondents in the Application was not complete and the Tribunal on a premise that the Respondents are avoiding service has proceeded to consider the matter on merits. The learned counsel would contend that the Tribunal has misdirected itself by making caustic comments which appear in para 5 of the impugned order. If the Tribunal was of the view that the Respondents were avoiding service of notice, the Tribunal ought to have directed the Applicants therein to serve the Respondents by having a recourse of other modes of service and only thereafter the Tribunal could have proceeded with the hearing of the Application. The impugned order in so far as it holds that the elections of the Applicants herein are illegal and imposes costs on the Applicants herein as a serious consequence for the Applicants herein and has the effect of having an impact on the legality of the tenure of the Applicants herein as Mutawallis pursuant to the elections held. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the impugned order is required to be set aside on the said ground. 6 Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 Shri Shaikh would contend that the conduct of the Applicants herein shows that they were deliberately avoiding service of the notices as the addresses mentioned in the Application and the addresses mentioned 0n the notices were same and if the notices were served on the earlier occasions there was no reason why the notices could not be served after the remand and the same can be attributed only to the fact that the Respondents therein were avoiding service. The learned counsel would contend that it was for the Applicants herein in fact to produce the order passed by this Court before the Wakf Tribunal so that the proceedings could have been recommenced. The Applicants herein having not done so are now seeking setting aside of the order on the ground that they were not served in the Application after its remand. 7 The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 Shri Momin would submit that the addresses in the Application and the addressed on the notices were same, and therefore, the observations made by the Tribunal in the impugned were justified. 7 The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 Shri Momin would submit that the addresses in the Application and the addressed on the notices were same, and therefore, the observations made by the Tribunal in the impugned were justified. However he ultimately leaves it to this Court. 8 Before adverting to the contentions which have been urged on behalf of the parties, it would be apposite to consider one aspect which has relevance in so far as the present proceedings are concerned, as per the scheme at present which is applicable to the Wakf in question and the tenure of the managing committee of the Wakf is for a period of one year. The said fact is also evidenced by the order dated 3/7/2009 by which the approval was again given to the elections of the Applicants herein and in which it has been stated that the tenure of the Applicants herein i.e. the managing committee would be for a period of one year. The said fact is also not disputed by the Applicants herein inasmuch as there is an averment in Para 8 on page 9 accepting further that the tenure of the managing committee is for a period of one year. Therefore the tenure of the Applicants as Mutawallis has come to an end long back in the year 2010 9 Now coming to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. In so far as the service of the notices on the Respondent Nos.3 to 11 in the Application i.e. the Applicants herein is concerned, though there can be no dispute about the fact that the addresses mentioned on the fresh notices on remand and the addresses mentioned in the Application were one and the same, the fact that the said notices were not served and there is no report to the said effect cannot be disputed. As indicated above, the Tribunal in spite of the said situation has proceeded to consider the said Application No.29 of 2009 on merits by observing that the Respondent Nos.3 to 11 have deliberately and perhaps with some sinister design to abuse the process of law are avoiding the service and therefore the notices have been returned unserved on false ground. In the absence of any report to the said effect the Tribunal has proceeded on the said assumption. In the absence of any report to the said effect the Tribunal has proceeded on the said assumption. If the Tribunal was of the view that the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 in the Application are avoiding the service, the Tribunal would have directed the Applicants to resort to other modes of service and after receiving the report could have thereafter proceeded to hear the matter on merits. Having not done so, in my view, the order stands vitiated on the ground that the principles of natural justice have been violated as the order impugned has been passed without hearing the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 in the Application. This has also to be considered in the context of the fact that the Tribunal has recorded findings as regards the legality of the elections of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 and also imposed costs on them, which is obviously prejudicial to the said Respondents. There is therefore merit in the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants Shri Warunjikar that since the finding is as regards the legality of the elections of the said Respondent Nos. 3 to 11, the effect of the order is that the said elections being held illegal, the same would have civil consequences for the said Respondents as well as the Wakf in question. Hence in so far as the said aspect is concerned, the clauses (2) (3), (4) and (6) of the operative part of the impugned order would have to be quashed and set aside and the matter is required to be remanded back to the Tribunal for a de-novo consideration as regards the aspect of the legality of the elections of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 to the Application. 10 In view of the fact that the tenure of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 as the members of the managing committee pursuant to the elections which were held and which were approved by the order dated 3/7/2009 has already come to an end long back, obviously they cannot be permitted to continue in office. 10 In view of the fact that the tenure of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 as the members of the managing committee pursuant to the elections which were held and which were approved by the order dated 3/7/2009 has already come to an end long back, obviously they cannot be permitted to continue in office. Since the direction as contained in clause (5) of the operative part of the impugned order is to the effect that the new scheme is to be propounded and elections to be held on the basis of the new scheme, till such time as direction in clause (5) are complied with, it would be just and proper to appoint an administrator on the Wakf in question. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 9 and 10 herein Shri Momin was on the last occasion directed to suggest the names of the persons who could be appointed as the administrator in the interregnum. The learned counsel Shri Momin has suggested three names out of which one is that of the Regional Wakf Officer, Konkan Division, Mumbai. The said Regional Wakf Officer, Konkan Division, Mumbai is hereby appointed as an administrator of the Wakf in question. He would be entitled to take assistance of such officials of the Wakf Board as he deems necessary. The above Civil Revision Application is accordingly partly allowed and the following directions are issued:- 1] The operative part of the impugned order dated 16/7/2011, in so far as clauses (2), (3), (4) and (6) are concerned, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Wakf Tribunal for a de-novo consideration of the Application No.29 of 2009. In so far as clause (1) of the operative part of the impugned order dted 16/7/2011 is concerned, instead of clause reading as “Application No.29/2009 is hereby allowed” would read as “Application No.29/2009 is partly allowed”. 2] The Regional Wakf Officer, Konkan Division, Mumbai is hereby appointed as the Administrator of the Wakf in question till such time as there is compliance of clause (5) of the directions as contained in the operative part of the impugned order dated 16/7/2011. 3] The directions in clause (5) of the operative part of the impugned order may be complied with expeditiously. 3] The directions in clause (5) of the operative part of the impugned order may be complied with expeditiously. The scheme in question which, according to the learned counsel for the Applicants Shri Warunjikar as also the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 herein Shri Shaikh, has been submitted, may be considered and the decision may be taken in respect of the same within six months from date, thereafter the elections to the managing committee be held in terms of the said scheme that would be accepted. 4] The Applicants herein will hand over the charge of the Wakf in question to the Regional Wakf Officer, Konkan Division, Mumbai within a period of four weeks from date. At the end of the four weeks period, if the charge is not handed over, the Administrator would be entitled to take charge unilaterally, if necessary. 5] Till handing over the charge, the Applicants would not deal with the property of the Wakf in question and would also not take any policy decision or disburse any amount out of the Wakf funds. 6] The administrator also not to deal with the property of the Wakf in question and would be entitled to take such policy decisions as would be in the interest of the Wakf in question and would also spend the funds of the Wakf only for the day to day expenses. 7] The above Civil Revision Application is accordingly partly allowed. 8] In respect of the issue that is remanded, the parties to appear before the Tribunal on 17th December 2012. The learned counsel for the parties make a statement that no further notice would be required and that their clients would appear before the Tribunal without any notice. The Tribunal on remand may decide the issue within a period of three months from the appearance of the parties before it on 17th December 2012. 9] The above Civil Revision Application is accordingly disposed of.