Judgment 1. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of parties. 2. Petitioner, the Maharashtra State Wakf Board, Aurangabad through its Chief Executive Officer, has filed present writ petitions challenging orders dated 7th March 2015 rejecting its application for intervention in Misc. Applications No. 8 of 2014 and 39 of 2014. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Wakf Board is constituted under Section 13 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and by virtue of Section 32, the power of general superintendence of all auqafs in the State of Maharashtra vest in the petitioner Board and it is the duty of the petitioner Board to ensure that the auqafs under its superintendence are properly maintained, controlled and administered. He submits that Hazrat Baba Tajuddin Trust is a Waqf, duly notified in the Gazette Notification dated 30.12.2004 and, therefore, the Joint Charity Commissioner will cease to have jurisdiction in the matter. The Waqf Board wants to assist the Joint Charity Commissioner. 4. As against this, Mr. A.C. Dharmadhikari submits that it is now “Hazrat Baba Tajuddin Trust” and not “Tajabag Committee” and, therefore, petitioner’s contention that the Joint Charity Commissioner has no jurisdiction, bears no merit. He submits that the Waqf Board has no jurisdiction in the matter and it is the Charity Commissioner which alone has jurisdiction over the matter. According to Mr. Dharmadhikari, it is not Muslim community people who have participation in the affairs of the Trust, but there are number of people belonging to other religions who have active role in the affairs of the Trust. Mr. Dharmadhikari states that if at all petitioner is allowed to intervene, it should be estopped from raising the issue of jurisdiction before the Joint Charity Commissioner. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon judgment of this Court rendered in Writ Petition No. 7171 of 2007 (Hazrat Baba Tajuddin Trust v. State of Maharashtra and anr) on 27th September 2010. I fail to understand as to how this judgment is useful for the petitioner. In that case, this Court has set aside order of the Authority under Section 43 of the Waqf Act declaring that the said Trust is a Waqf within the meaning of the Waqf Act, 1995. The Division Bench, however, observed that there has to be a survey report submitted to the Board by the State Government before making order under Section 5(2) of the Act. 6. The Division Bench, however, observed that there has to be a survey report submitted to the Board by the State Government before making order under Section 5(2) of the Act. 6. Be that as it may. Here, I am not supposed to examine any aspects of the matter on merit. Petitioner is a statutory Board constituted under Section 13 of the Waqf Act, 1995. Its right to assist the Joint Charity Commissioner in the matter definitely exists though it is settled position of law that intervener has no right to ask for any relief. As regards the question of jurisdiction, whether the Waqf Board raises it or not, it will be the duty of Joint Charity Commissioner to examine whether he has jurisdiction over the matter in hand or not. At any rate, in my opinion, in the light of the principles of natural justice, applications for intervention will have to be granted to ensure that intervener is not condemned as unheard. 7. In the result, writ petitions are allowed. Impugned orders dated 7th March 2015 are set aside. Applications at exhibits 21 and 26 are allowed. Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.