ORDER : C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. 1. The issue involved in this case is whether Ansari Charitable Trust (for short 'the Trust') is a Waqf as defined under Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act or a trust created under the Indian Trust Act. A succinct narration of the facts is required for proper disposal of this revision petition. 2. This revision petition is filed by the Waqf Board against the order dated 12.2.2009 in W.O.A.No.7 of 2006 passed by the Waqf Tribunal, Ernakulam. It is the common case that the Trust was formed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining hospital, library, reading room and Arabic college and to promote adult education, to foster and educate orphans by establishing orphanages, without discrimination of caste or creed. It was founded by one Smt.Valiyakath Jameela Abdul Majeed as per trust deed dated 8.9.1979. On 14.6.1999 the revision petitioner, the Waqf Board, issued a letter to the Trust requiring it to register under the Waqf Act. Furthermore, it was informed thereunder that in case of failure to register it as Waqf, voluntarily, suo motu proceedings for registering it as Waqf would be taken. On its receipt, the respondent sent reply dated 06.9.1999, accompanied by an affidavit highlighting and clarifying the intention behind the formation of the Trust and also sought for a re-hearing in the matter. Trust deed and other documents were produced before the Waqf Board. Thereupon, as per proceedings dated A2-1795/97 dated 22.11.1999, the Waqf Board declared that the Trust is a Waqf and directed the trustees to register it as a Waqf under the Waqf Act. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein had approached this Court by filing O.P.No.2083/2000. This Court disposed of the said writ petition as per judgment dated 6.3.2006 holding that if the petitioner has any dispute as to whether the Trust is a Waqf or not, the remedy open to the petitioner therein/the respondent herein, is to get the same adjudicated by the Waqf Tribunal by moving it appropriately. In that view of the matter, liberty was granted to the petitioner therein/ the respondent herein to approach the Waqf Tribunal within the time stipulated thereunder. Consequently, the respondent herein filed WOA No.7/2006 which culminated in the impugned order. As per the impugned order, the Tribunal found that the proceedings dated 22.11.1999 of the Waqf Board is not sustainable and consequently, set it aside. Consequently, the respondent herein filed WOA No.7/2006 which culminated in the impugned order. As per the impugned order, the Tribunal found that the proceedings dated 22.11.1999 of the Waqf Board is not sustainable and consequently, set it aside. It is challenging the said order in WOA No.7/2006 passed by the Waqf Tribunal, Ernakulam setting aside the proceedings of the Waqf Board dated 22.11.1999, the captioned revision petition has been filed. 3. We have heard the learned standing counsel for the Waqf Board, the revision petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. We have already noted that the Trust in question was created as per deed dated 8.9.1979. The purpose and intention for its creation, going by the recital in the said deed have been extracted in the memorandum of revision petition as hereunder:- “(a) To establish and maintain, Hospital, Library and Reading room and Arabic College and to facilitate Adult education. (b) To help, assist or otherwise support and accelerate, facilitate and propagate the teaching of Islam among the members of the Muslim Community in particular and among others at large. (c) To facilitate the Islamic cultural and educational values by providing scholarships, prizes, books, fees and other educational facilities to the deserving pupils of the Muslim community. (d) To encourage religious instructions and religious activities in promoting the cause of Islam. (e) To foster and educate orphans and establish and maintain their orphanages without any discrimination of caste or creed. (f) To expend for all causes of Islam as and when decided by the Board of Trustees. (g) To render all services required for the uplift and prosperity of all sections of people without any discrimination of caste or creed.” 5. Essentially, the contention of the revision petitioner is that the objects, intention and directives in the deed, as extracted above, would reveal that they are recognised by Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable. The further contentions of the revision petitioner are as follows:- “The wakf deed itself would reveal that the Board of Trustees consists of 21 persons, all belonged to Muslim community. Going by the provisions under the deed, the Trust got the power to accept, trusteeships, Mutawalliships of other Wakfs and trusts. There is also provision for receipt of donation, grant and gift from others for carrying out the objects of the Trust as specified in the deed. Going by the provisions under the deed, the Trust got the power to accept, trusteeships, Mutawalliships of other Wakfs and trusts. There is also provision for receipt of donation, grant and gift from others for carrying out the objects of the Trust as specified in the deed. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that a perusal of the order dated 22.11.1999 impugned before the Tribunal itself would reveal that an officer of the Wakf Board who conducted an enquiry reported the existence of a mosque in the property of the Trust. According to the learned counsel it is taking into account of such aspects that the Wakf Board had arrived at the conclusion that the Trust is a Wakf for the purpose of the Wakf Act, as defined under Section 3(r) thereof. Consequential direction and caution, as noticed hereinbefore, were issued based on the said finding, it is submitted. However, the aforesaid contractions made to establish that the Trust is a Waqf, have been stoutly denied by the respondent herein. 6. As noticed earlier, it was pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court in W.P.(C).No.2083 of 2000 that the respondent herein filed WOA No.7 of 2006 before the Tribunal. Evidently, the Tribunal had considered the question whether the Trust is a Waqf or a Trust under the Indian Trust Act. The Tribunal held that once a property is dedicated, the property would vest in the God Almighty and therefore, the main determinant factor on the question whether the 'Trust' is a Waqf or not, is the factual position pertaining to permanent dedication of the property. In other words, the question is whether there is a permanent dedication of the property by a person professing Islam for any purpose recognised by Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable. Certainly, dedication, if any, must be by a person competent in all respects for its dedication. Before adverting to the reasons that persuaded the Tribunal to arrive at a finding that it is not a Waqf , we think it appropriate to refer to Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act. Certainly, dedication, if any, must be by a person competent in all respects for its dedication. Before adverting to the reasons that persuaded the Tribunal to arrive at a finding that it is not a Waqf , we think it appropriate to refer to Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act. It reads as follows:- Section 3(r): “waqf” means the permanent dedication by any person, of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable and includes— (i) a waqf by user but such waqf shall not cease to be a waqf by reason only of the user having ceased irrespective of the period of such cesser; (ii) a Shamlat Patti, Shamlat Deh, Jumla Malkkan or by any other name entered in a revenue record; (iii) “grants”, including mashrat-ul-khidmat for any purpose recognised by the Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable; and (iv) a waqf-alal-aulad to the extent to which the property is dedicated for any purpose recognised by Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable, provided when the line of succession fails, the income of the waqf shall be spent for education, development, welfare and such other purposes as recognised by Muslim law, and “waqif” means any person making such deed.” 7. Section 3(r), as afore-extracted, was substituted by Act 27 of 2013 with effect from 1.11.2013 and going by the same permanent dedication so as to create a waqf could be made by any person. True that before its substitution under Section 3(r), such a permanent dedication could have been made only by a person professing Islam. Conspicuously the words 'professing Islam' has been deleted as per Act 27 of 2013. The other ingredient so as to create a Waqf is that such dedication of any movable or immovable property by any person must be for any purpose recognised by Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable. 8. A perusal of the Trust deed dated 8.9.1979 revealing the objects of the Trust undoubtedly reveal that it would satisfy the second ingredient to create a waqf. In other words, it would reveal the objects of the Trust are those recognised by Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable. But, the crucial question is whether there is any dedication of property, movable or immovable, for the said purpose. In other words, it would reveal the objects of the Trust are those recognised by Muslim law as pious, religious or charitable. But, the crucial question is whether there is any dedication of property, movable or immovable, for the said purpose. We are of the considered view that even if objects of a Trust are recognised by Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable, in order to bring it within the definition of Waqf under Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act the movable or immovable property involved must have been permanently dedicated by a person for those purposes recognised by Muslim law. In other words, the question whether the property in question was dedicated for such a purpose would decide the question whether it is a Waqf or a Trust. We are fortified in this view by a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs v. Yusuf Bhai Chawala and others [ (2012) 6 SCC 328 ]. In the contextual situation, it is worthy to extract paragraph 38 of the said decision. It reads as under:- “There is a vast difference between Muslim wakfs and trusts created by Muslims. The basic difference is that wakf properties are dedicated to God and the “wakif” or dedicator does not retain any title over the wakf properties. As far as trusts are concerned, the properties are not vested in God. Some of the objects of such trusts are for running charitable organisations such as hospitals, shelter homes, orphanages and charitable dispensaries, which acts, though recognised as pious, do not divest the author of the trust from the title of the properties in the trust, unless he relinquishes such title in favour of the trust or the trustees. At times, the dividing line between public trusts and wakfs may be thin, but the main factor always is that while wakf properties vest in God Almighty, the trust properties do not vest in God and the trustees in terms of deed of trust are entitled to deal with the same for the benefit of the trust and its beneficiaries.” (Emphasis added) 9. A Division Bench of this Court in Haji P Liakath Alikhan v. K.Unneenkutty Saquafi and others [ILR 2005(4) Kerala 530] held that creation of Waqf is the tying up of the property concerned in the ownership of God the Almighty and the devotion of the profits for the benefit of human beings. As a result of creation of Waqf, the right of Waqif is extinguished and the ownership would vest with the God Almighty. It is further held therein that for the purpose of creation of Waqf there must be a permanent dedication of a movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable by a person professing Islam. True that it was held that it should be by a person professing Islam, as the case dealt with by the Division Bench, was prior to the amendment to Section 3(r) by Act of 27 of 2013. In this case also, the dedication was prior to the coming into force of the substituted Section 3(r) of the Waqf Act. As noticed hereinbefore, the Trust was founded by a Muslim lady. 10. Be that as it may, the question is whether there is any permanent dedication of movable or immovable property and whether the properties would vest with the God Almighty, going by the deed in question. Certainly, it is not a question of law, but it is a pure question of fact. The recital in the deed in question dated 8.9.1979 has to be looked into for deciding the question whether there was any permanent dedication of the properties scheduled thereunder. In the Trust deed dated 8.9.1979, the powers of the Board of the Trust have been provided under Clause 8 and sub-clause (e) thereunder reads thus:- “The Board shall not have the power to sell the properties of the Trust or any part thereof, except in the cases of unavoidable necessity and circumstances or for purchasing other more beneficial properties movable or gift. But the Board shall have the power to pawn, pledge or mortgage the Trust properties to borrow and to raise funds and loans for the purpose of this Trust and no such sale, pawn, pledge or mortgage shall be valid unless made after the decisions of the Board by 75% of its existing strength and all such transactions and purchases shall be made in the name of the Chairman of the Trust.” (Emphasis added) Clause 20 of the deed runs as follows:- “Irrevocability:- This Trust is an irrevocable Trust and neither I nor my descendants have any right or authority to revoke it.” 11. Thus, the Trust deed dated 8.9.1979 itself would reveal that there was no absolute bar for effecting sale of the property of the Trust. True that the power for the Board of the Trust to effect sale of the property is conditional, as can be seen from Clause 8(e). But, at the same time, as is evident from Clause 8(e), the power to alienate the property in the manner provided thereunder is available with the Board. That apart, a careful scanning of the deed dated 8.9.1979, a copy of which was handed over to us for perusal by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, would reveal that there is absolute absence of any recital which would indicate permanent dedication of the movable or immovable property to the God Almighty. In the contextual situation it is also relevant to refer to Clause 2 of the said deed dated 8.9.1979. It reads thus:- “I do hereby, grant, set apart and appoint all the properties described in the Schedule herein below in Trust and transfer them to the Trustees designed below with and subject to the powers thereinafter expressly stated.” (Emphasis added) 12. It is thus clear that in unambiguous terms the founder of the Trust, in the Trust deed dated 8.9.1979, stated that the right of the executant/owner was transferred only to the trustees and that it is an irrevocable Trust. It is thus obvious that the determinant factor to be satisfied to create a Waqf viz, divesting of ownership from the Waqif and vesting of the same with God Almighty, is conspicuously absent in the deed in question. In this context ,it is also relevant to note that on 23.9.1993, an amendment was made to the deed. Thereby, Clause 24 was also introduced. In this context ,it is also relevant to note that on 23.9.1993, an amendment was made to the deed. Thereby, Clause 24 was also introduced. It reads thus :- “In the event of dissolution, the net assets, if any after satisfying all the debts and liabilities will either be transferred to Trust/Societies having the same or similar object or vest with Government.” 13. Thus, it can be seen that the Trust Deed dated 8.9.1979 as also the amendment brought to it as on 23.9.1993 would not reveal permanent dedication of the movable or immovable property scheduled thereunder to the God Almighty. On the contrary, going by the deed dated 8.9.1979 it was transferred to the trustees and going by the amendment brought in, on 23.9.1993, even in case of dissolution of the Trust, the net assets, after satisfying all the debts and liabilities, would either be transferred to the Trust/Societies having the same or similar objects or vest with Government. In this case, the trust properties do not vest in God and the trustees, in terms of deed of trust, are entitled to deal with the same for the benefit of the trust and its beneficiaries and even in the event of its dissolution, the net assets, if any after satisfying all the debts and liabilities would either be tranferred to Trust/ Societies having the same or similar object or vest with Government. In such circumstances, by applying the ratio of the decision in Yusuf Bhai Chawla's case it has to be held that there is no impropriety or illegality or incorrectness, in the order of the Tribunal. 14. In such circumstances, when once it is clear that as per the deed in question, there was no permanent dedication of the movable or immovable properties to the God Almighty, even the satisfaction of the purpose for which it was created is pious, religious or charitable as recognised by Muslim Law and that the deed was executed by a person professing Islam would not bring it within the definition of Waqf, for the purpose of Waqf Act. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to hold that the Tribunal had gone wrong in arriving at the conclusion that the Trust in question created under the deed dated 8.9.1979 is not a Waqf and it is only a Trust under the Indian Trust Act. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to hold that the Tribunal had gone wrong in arriving at the conclusion that the Trust in question created under the deed dated 8.9.1979 is not a Waqf and it is only a Trust under the Indian Trust Act. The long and short of the discussion is that there is no merit in the revision petition and therefore, it must fail. Consequently, this revision petition is dismissed.