Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1035 (HP)

Imran Khan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2015-08-06

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. 1. The writ petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by the medium of public interest litigation for commanding the respondents, i.e. the State and the Wakf authorities, to evict the unauthorized persons and remove the encroachments made in the mosques in Shimla. 2. Orders have been made from time to time. It is apt to reproduce order, dated 08.07.2014, made by this Court herein: "It pains us to record herein that neither the Wakf Board nor the SDM concerned are doing the needful in terms of the orders passed by this Court and are evading the process of law. In terms of the status report filed by the State, it appears that they had to take all steps by 30th May, 2014 and were under legal obligation to file status thereafter, which has not been done. 2. Mr. J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, stated at the Bar that physical verification was made in presence of one of the officers of the Wakf Board and it was found that some persons, who were evicted earlier, have re-entered and some other persons have also taken over illegal possession and the Wakf Authorities have been asked to pass appropriate orders. His statement is taken on record. But, no such status report is on the file. 3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct respondent No. 3 to pass appropriate orders warranted under law, enabling respondents No. 1, 4 and 5 to execute the eviction orders. 4. At this stage, Mr. B.S. Attri, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, stated at the Bar that some persons have filed suits before the Civil Court/Wakf Tribunal. All the Civil Courts in Shimla are directed to decide these cases as early as possible, preferably within one month. Wakf Board is directed to examine the issue and pass orders within the same period and also to examine the recent judgment of the Apex Court in Faseela M. vs. Munnerul Islam Madrasa Committee and Another, 2014 AIR SCW 2503, whether the Wakf Board has power, jurisdiction and competence to hear such cases. 5. All the authorities are directed to submit reports within four weeks. List on 12th August, 2014." 3. Respondents have filed status reports. 5. All the authorities are directed to submit reports within four weeks. List on 12th August, 2014." 3. Respondents have filed status reports. This Court, after taking into consideration the reports, directed the respondents-authorities to take steps, as required under law, for evicting the unauthorized occupants and removing the encroachments. 4. Mr. G.D. Verma, learned Senior Counsel, appeared on behalf of the Wakf authorities and brought into the notice of the Court that the Wakf authorities have settled the dispute with the occupants of the hall of the Jama Masjid Mosque and sought time to place the same on record, has placed the said documents on record alongwith compliance report, dated 11.05.2015. 5. We have gone through the compliance report filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3, i.e. the Wakf authorities, and the settlement arrived at between the Chairman of the Wakf Board and the occupants of the hall of Jama Masjid. 6. It is apt to reproduce relevant portion of the said document herein: "(i) to (ii)................... (iii) The request for reservation of space in hall would be made in writing 2 days in advance and in no case permit for more than 15 days will be issued at one stretch without the prior approval of Chief Executive Officer, HP Wakf Board. Maintenance charges @ Rs. 20/- per day or as may be decided by the H.P. Wakf Board from time to time will be charged from time to time from the applicant before issuance of the permit. (iv) Only the permit holders in whose name the permit is issued or reservation is made would be allowed to stay in the Hall. Any occupant staying without permit/ permission of the H.P. Wakf Board will be liable to pay @ Rs. 1000/- per day for use of space and will also be liable to be prosecuted under the law." 7. Thus, the said persons cannot be said to be unauthorized occupants, but are in permissive possession. The said document is made part of the file. 8. The compliance report filed by the Wakf authorities also deals with the encroachments made in Boileauganj Mosque and Kutub Masjid and it is stated that some cases are pending before this Court, the Wakf Tribunal and other Wakf authorities, particulars of which have been given in paras 4 (ii) and (iii) of the compliance report. 9. 8. The compliance report filed by the Wakf authorities also deals with the encroachments made in Boileauganj Mosque and Kutub Masjid and it is stated that some cases are pending before this Court, the Wakf Tribunal and other Wakf authorities, particulars of which have been given in paras 4 (ii) and (iii) of the compliance report. 9. The authorities are directed to decide the matters pending before them as early as possible, preferably within four weeks. 10. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to list the cases pending before this Court before the Benches, having the Roster, in the next week if dates is/are not fixed and if dates is/are fixed, then on the dates fixed, before the Bench, which has made the order or which is having the Roster. Request is made to the Hon'ble Judges, hearing the cases to decide the said cases as early as possible, preferably within four weeks. 11. The Wakf authorities are directed to furnish details of the other eviction proceedings drawn against the encroachers, which are yet to be taken to its logical end. 12. We also deem it proper to direct the Secretary (Revenue) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh and the Chairman of the Himachal Pradesh Wakf Board to furnish details of the Wakf properties encroached upon in the entire State of Himachal Pradesh, particulars of the persons, who have encroached upon the same, the action/proceedings drawn and the output of the said action/proceedings, by or before the next date. 13. List on 7th September, 2015.