JUDGMENT (A.M.Sapre, CJ) Heard Mr. M. H. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. B. S. Goyal, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondents. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, we are not inclined to entertain this petition filed to invoke our extraordinary jurisdiction of “public interest litigation (PIL)” under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, the grievance raised by the petitioner pertains to wakf property situated at Bara Masjid, Tezpur and such issues relating to any wakf property are dealt with and decided by the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995. In other words, in our view, the remedy of the petitioners lie in approaching the concern Wakf Tribunal of the area which is competent to decide the questions raised by the petitioners. On our perusal of the averments made in the petition, we find that the issue raised in this petition is of the nature which squarely falls under section 83(1) of the Wakf Act for being tried only by the Wakf Tribunal. We, therefore, allow the petitioner to withdraw this PIL to enable them to approach the Wakf Tribunal for adjudication of their grievance raised in this petition. No cost.