Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 843 (JHR)

Abdul Mannan v. State of Jharkhand

2022-07-13

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2022
JUDGMENT : W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022 has been preferred for directing the Chief Executive Officer, Jharkhand State Sunni Wakf Board (respondent no.8) to conduct fair and transparent election of the Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi (hereinafter referred as “the said Waqf”) and to restrain the Chief Election Convenor, Election Committee, Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi (respondent no.6) as well as Member, Election Committee, Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi (respondent no.7) to conduct the said election. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.6 to provide the documents relating to criteria of acceptance and rejection of applications of the voters whose names exist in the voter list of the said Waqf. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 3 to enquire the conduct of the respondent nos. 6 and 7 in preparation of the voter list and submit report as to who can be the bonafide voters as per Bye-laws of the said Waqf. 2. W.P.(C) No. 4307 of 2021 has been filed for setting aside the notification issued for conducting Election, 2021 of Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi (Waqf No.-1701) and also for setting aside the press release issued by the respondent no.3. Further prayer has been made for setting aside the said election process and to dissolve the present election committee. The petitioner has also prayed for directing the Jharkhand State Sunni Waqf Board to supersede the adhoc committee of Anjuman Islamia which has completed its tenure on 21.04.2021 and to further direct the Waqf Board to constitute a new adhoc committee so as to conduct the said election in fair and transparent manner. 3. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in both the writ petitions, submits that the outgoing committee of the said Waqf, whose term had already expired on 21.04.2021, constituted a 10-members election committee headed by Dr. Syed Iqbal Hussain [the respondent no.6 of W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022] in violation of the Bye-laws of the said Waqf. The said respondent issued notification for the purpose of conducting Election-2021 of the said Waqf vide notification no. AI/RAN/EC/65 dated 06.11.2021 whereby election schedule was notified in contravention of clause-21 of the Bye-laws of Anjuman Islamia as no committee was formed for redressal of the grievances of the complainants raised before the respondent no.6. The said respondent issued notification for the purpose of conducting Election-2021 of the said Waqf vide notification no. AI/RAN/EC/65 dated 06.11.2021 whereby election schedule was notified in contravention of clause-21 of the Bye-laws of Anjuman Islamia as no committee was formed for redressal of the grievances of the complainants raised before the respondent no.6. It is further submitted that the respondent no.7, who is also Imam of Iqra Masjid and temporary teacher of Maulana Azad College operated by the Anjuman Islamia, is the member of election committee and as such he could not have been selected as a member of the election committee. The respondent no.7 is campaigning for a particular candidate which raises doubt on his credentials. A complaint was made to the respondent no. 3 on 06.11.2021 by an organization namely Aryan Help Line stating that there were several irregularities in the voter list prepared by the respondent nos. 6 and 7 since the members of existing organizations have not been made voters, whereas the members of non-existing organizations have been included in the voter list. Moreover, several persons who have donated in the said Waqf through various modes have not been made members of ‘Majlis-e-Muntazima’. The respondent no. 6 has added those persons in the voter list whose organizations do not come under the jurisdiction of said Waqf or those whose organizations have not even been established. It is also submitted that women can also be the members of ‘Majlis-e-Muntajima’ but the respondent no.7 has not included their names in the voter list in spite of applications filed by them undermining the fact that equal status has been given to women in the Constitution of India. Further, the respondent no. 7 has not taken steps to form a committee for redressal of grievances, if any, raised regarding election of Anjuman Islamia which suggests that he is in a hurry to conduct the election of the said Waqf in violation of its Bye-laws. The respondent no. 6 has also not been considering the complaint received by him regarding irregularities being committed in preparation of the voter list. In the year 2013 and 2018, the respondent no. 8 had conducted fair and transparent election of the said Waqf and as such direction may be issued to the said respondent to conduct the election-2021 as well in view of various irregularities being committed by the respondent nos. 6 and 7. In the year 2013 and 2018, the respondent no. 8 had conducted fair and transparent election of the said Waqf and as such direction may be issued to the said respondent to conduct the election-2021 as well in view of various irregularities being committed by the respondent nos. 6 and 7. 4. Mr. Afaque Ahmed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- Jharkhand State Sunni Wakf Board, in both the writ petitions, submits that the respondent no.8 on receiving the applications of Central Moharram Committee, Ranchi as well as of other social organizations and through different newspapers, came to know about the irregularities being committed in conducting the election of the said Waqf. As such, he wrote letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi on 09.11.2021 enclosing the said applications and requesting to take action for conducting fair and peaceful election of Anjuman Islamia as per the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013 and Bye-laws of the said Waqf after verifying the allegations. It is further submitted that the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, vide letter dated 15.03.2022, sought appropriate instruction from the respondent no. 8 who in response to the same, vide letter dated 28.03.2022, sent detailed guidelines to the said authority regarding conducting election of the said Waqf as per its Bye-laws. The respondent no.8, having come to know the discrepancies in the voter list, vide letter dated 03.06.2022, directed the respondent no. 6 to verify the voter list in view of written complaints alleging irregularities in the same and to take immediate action for fair and transparent election of said Waqf. It is also submitted that on receiving a copy of letter no. AI/RAN/EL/149 dated 02.06.2022 whereby election notice/programme of the said Waqf was announced by the respondent no. 6, the respondent no. 8, vide letter dated 10.06.2022, informed him that verification report in relation to the alleged irregularities committed in preparing the voter list had not yet been received from the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and in that situation, notifying the election programme was not proper. Further request was made to the respondent no.6 to personally contact the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi for proper rectification of the voter list and thereafter, to proceed for conducting fair and peaceful election of the said Waqf as per its Bye-laws. 5. The learned counsel for the State, while referring to counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. Further request was made to the respondent no.6 to personally contact the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi for proper rectification of the voter list and thereafter, to proceed for conducting fair and peaceful election of the said Waqf as per its Bye-laws. 5. The learned counsel for the State, while referring to counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 of W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022, submits that the tenure of the existing Jharkhand State Sunni Waqf Board had come to an end on 16.10.2019 and a proposal was initiated for reconstitution of the said Board in light of the provisions contained under Section 14 of the Waqf Act, 1995 as amended in the year 2013 which is pending consideration before the competent authority of the State Government. It is further submitted that vide departmental notification no. 2132 dated 25.06.2019, three members (one chairman and two members) Waqf Tribunal has been constituted by the Government of Jharkhand and presently in terms of departmental notification no. 891 dated 23.03.2022, Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, District and Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella has been appointed and posted as Chairman of the said Tribunal. Further, on account of transfer of one member from State Administrative Service, a request has been made vide departmental letter no. 1425 dated 13.05.2022 to the Principal Secretary, department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand to post an officer of the State Administrative Service cadre against the vacant post of member of the Jharkhand Waqf Tribunal. Recently a reminder to that effect has been issued vide letter no. 1708 dated 15.06.2022. The process for appointment of the third member has also been initiated by inviting applications in terms of expression of interest vide advertisement dated 16.06.2022. 6. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 6 and 7 of W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022, submits that the said Waqf is managed through an executive committee elected and constituted in every three years as per the provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995 and its Bye-laws. The respondent no.6 has been appointed as Chief Election Convener vide letter No. - Al/GS/2513/21 dated 05.04.2021 as per provision of the Bye-laws to look after the election process of the said Waqf in fair and transparent manner. The respondent no.6 has been appointed as Chief Election Convener vide letter No. - Al/GS/2513/21 dated 05.04.2021 as per provision of the Bye-laws to look after the election process of the said Waqf in fair and transparent manner. In fact not a single complaint has been received by the respondent no.6, rather he has come to know that some persons have preferred written complaint directly to the Chief Minister, Jharkhand and the respondent no. 8 which is not in accordance with the provisions of clause - 21 of the Bye-laws of the said Waqf. An employee of the said Waqf cannot contest election, however the Bye-laws is silent about selection of members of the election committee of the said Waqf and it also does not restrict any Imam to preach or practice any kind of speech or sermon inside Mosque. It is further submitted that the respondent no.6 has issued a notification vide Ref. No. - AI/RAN/EC/69 dated 09.11.2021 for redressal of grievances regarding addition of names of eligible persons in the voter list of Anjuman Islamia and to afford ample opportunity to all the aggrieved person(s) in this connection. On perusal of clause-30 of the Bye-laws, it would appear that the donor must get receipt for the donated amount from the office of the Waqf along with the signature and seal of the General Secretary of the said Waqf. The petitioners have annexed few documents with the writ petitions suggesting payments made by several persons in the bank account of the Waqf under the heading of Relief Fund. However, the said amount was not paid in the office of the Waqf and no receipt against the said payment was issued by the said office and therefore those members cannot be considered to be the donors of the said Waqf. Moreover, the signature of the General Secretary, Anjuman Islamia on the said documents was made only to certify that the said amount was paid for relief fund and for convenience of the said Waqf. It is also submitted that not a single word has been mentioned in the entire Bye-laws of the said Waqf regarding inclusion of any female voter. Hence, the election committee has decided not to consider any female member in preparation of the voter list. Dr. It is also submitted that not a single word has been mentioned in the entire Bye-laws of the said Waqf regarding inclusion of any female voter. Hence, the election committee has decided not to consider any female member in preparation of the voter list. Dr. Sajda Khatoon, Ward Councilor of Ward No.-23 had represented the Respondent No.5- the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi for inclusion of her name in the voter list of election- 2021 which is in clear violation of clause- 21 of the Bye-laws. Clause- 2 of the Bye-laws clarifies indirect voting rights and direct voting rights wherein it has been mentioned that all general members have indirect voting rights whereas ‘Dawami’ member, ‘Mohsin’ or ‘Wakfin’ have direct voting rights. For executing indirect voting rights in the said Wakf, those persons, who are attached with any Muslim Panchayat, Masjid, Madrasa, non-political muslim organizations or social institutions, ‘Adabi Anjumans’ etc. within the constituency of Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi, shall have the right to nominate certain number of members as described in the said clause. It is also submitted that the respondent no. 6 has followed the Bye - laws of the said Wakf without any discrimination which can be seen from the notice issued prior to preparation of final voters list. None of the members of the election committee has supported any candidate or has added his voter in the voter list, however some persons are unnecessarily trying to stop the election in order to remain in charge of the said Waqf. The voter list has been prepared with proper care by including all the genuine voters of the said Waqf who were left out during the scrutiny made by the office clerk of the election committee. The respondent no.6 along with the election committee has ensured to include genuine voters as per the provision of the Bye-laws of the said Wakf without any discrimination except eliminating false and fake voters. It is further submitted that no administrative officer, the C.E.O. Waqf Board, Ranchi or any political person has the jurisdiction to directly interfere with the affairs of the said Wakf which is governed by its Bye - laws which also provides redressal mechanism for any dispute relating to election of the Wakf. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The petitioners seek intervention of this court towards the election process for conducting election-2021 of Anjuman Islamia, Ranchi as being undertaken by the election committee including the respondent nos. 6 and 7. 8. Earlier, this court had an occasion to deal with the election dispute of the same Waqf raised under its writ jurisdiction. In the said case i.e Federal Anjuman Islamia Vs. The State of Jharkhand through the Ministry of the Welfare Minority, Government of Jharkhand & Ors. reported in (2018) 1 JBCJ 631 (HC), this Court held as under:- “9. On perusal of the aforesaid provisions, it would be evident that the Board has all the powers of the superintendence of all the Waqf to ensure that the Waqf is properly maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is applied to the object and purpose for which the Waqf is constituted. In terms of Section 32(2)(d) of the Act, 1995 it is the power of the Board to settle the schemes of a Waqf's management and if such scheme is framed, any person who is aggrieved by said scheme may file a suit before the Tribunal for setting aside such settlement. Further, section 67(2) of the Act, 1995 provides that if the Board is satisfied that any committee of a Waqf is not functioning properly and satisfactorily or that the Waqf is being mismanaged, the Board may supersede such committee and as per section 67(5), at the time of such supersession, it is mandatory for the Board to constitute a new committee simultaneously. First proviso of sub section 4 of section 67 provides that any person aggrieved by an order of supersession passed under sub section 2 may file an appeal before the Tribunal. Sub section 2 of section 67 starts with non-obstante clause and as such irrespective of anything contained in the Act, 1995 or the deed of the Waqf, the power conferred to the Board under sub section 2 can be exercised. It thus emerges that the Board has the full power to constitute any committee for management of any Waqf or take the management of the Waqf if so required and any person having objection to the decision of the Board, may challenge the same before the Tribunal constituted under section 83 of the Act, 1995. 10. It thus emerges that the Board has the full power to constitute any committee for management of any Waqf or take the management of the Waqf if so required and any person having objection to the decision of the Board, may challenge the same before the Tribunal constituted under section 83 of the Act, 1995. 10. In the said factual context of the present case, the Board, after having taken into consideration that the election was not held within time and it is required to constitute an ad-hoc committee, formed the same for the said Waqf which was within its jurisdiction of the Board and as such the same cannot be questioned by the petitioners on the ground that the action of the Board is beyond the provisions of the bye-laws of the Waqf. The petitioners have also sought intervention of this court in the election process of the Waqf contending that many fake voters have been included in the voter list. The respondents on the other hand have put reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this court rendered in W.P. PIL No. 5986 of 2013 wherein the election dispute of the Waqf was raised, but the same was dismissed having found that the matter did not relate to public interest and also keeping in view that the tribunal has already been constituted. 11. In my considered opinion also, all disputes pertaining to Waqf should be filed before the Waqf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act, 1995 and at the first instance such dispute should not be entertained by the writ court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Courts in India are already tottering and reeling under the burden of massive arrears which have flooded the dockets of the Court, and if any liberal approach is taken to entertain any such dispute, the same will further burden the writ courts in resolving the inter-se-dispute of different factions of the Waqf's Committees. However, the petitioner has stated on affidavit that at present the Tribunal is not functioning in the State of Jharkhand due to lack of infrastructure and the said statement of the petitioner has not been denied by the respondents. However, the petitioner has stated on affidavit that at present the Tribunal is not functioning in the State of Jharkhand due to lack of infrastructure and the said statement of the petitioner has not been denied by the respondents. Moreover, at the time of argument, all the learned counsel for the parties stated at Bar that though the Constitution of the tribunal has been notified by the Government of Jharkhand, the same is presently not functional due to lack of infrastructure. Thus, the situation is such that the Tribunal is not functional in the State of Jharkhand at present and the election of Waqf is pending since long due to tussle between two factions for their supremacy putting the affairs of the waqf in jeopardy. It is further revealed from the letter dated 04.01.2017 issued by the Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate Ranchi to the CEO of the Bord that if the election is conducted without verifying the voter list, it will create law and order problem and as such under the said exceptional circumstance, the intervention of this court is required to facilitate the progress of election so that the dispute is resolved and the election of the Waqf is conducted at the earliest. In the case of Election Commission of India though Secretary v. Ashok Kumar reported in (2000) 8 SCC 216 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus:— 32. For convenience sake we would now generally sum up our conclusions by partly restating what the two Constitution Benches have already said and then adding by clarifying what follows therefrom in view of the analysis made by us hereinabove:— 1) If an election, (the term election being widely interpreted so as to include all steps and entire proceedings commencing from the date of notification of election till the date of declaration of result) is to be called in question and which questioning may have the effect of interrupting, obstructing or protracting the election proceedings in any manner, the invoking of judicial remedy has to be postponed till after the completing of proceedings in elections. 2) Any decision sought and rendered will not amount to calling in question an election if it subserves the progress of the election and facilitates the completion of the election. Anything done towards completing or in furtherance of the election proceedings cannot be described as questioning the election. 2) Any decision sought and rendered will not amount to calling in question an election if it subserves the progress of the election and facilitates the completion of the election. Anything done towards completing or in furtherance of the election proceedings cannot be described as questioning the election. 3) Subject to the above, the action taken or orders issued by Election Commission are open to judicial review on the well-settled parameters which enable judicial review of decisions of statutory bodies such as on a case of mala fide or arbitrary exercise of power being made out or the statutory body being shown to have acted in breach of law. 4) Without interrupting, obstructing or delaying the progress of the election proceedings, judicial intervention is available if assistance of the Court has been sought for merely to correct or smoothen the progress of the election proceedings, to remove the obstacles therein, or to preserve a vital piece of evidence if the same would be lost or destroyed or rendered irretrievable by the time the results are declared and stage is set for invoking the jurisdiction of the Court. 5) The Court must be very circumspect and act with caution while entertaining any election dispute though not hit by the bar of Article 329(b) but brought to it during the pendency of election proceedings. The Court must guard against any attempt at retarding, interrupting, protracting or stalling of the election proceedings. Care has to be taken to see that there is no attempt to utilise the courts indulgence by filing a petition outwardly innocuous but essentially a subterfuge or pretext for achieving an ulterior or hidden end. Needless to say that in the very nature of the things the Court would act with reluctance and shall not act except on a clear and strong case for its intervention having been made out by raising the pleas with particulars and precision and supporting the same by necessary material.” 12. On perusal of the aforesaid judgment, it would emerge that the High Court may interfere in such matters, if the said interference is to sub-serve the election, election process and not to interrupt or interfere with the election or the election process. On perusal of the aforesaid judgment, it would emerge that the High Court may interfere in such matters, if the said interference is to sub-serve the election, election process and not to interrupt or interfere with the election or the election process. Intervention of the writ court is required when the Court's assistance is sought merely to correct or smoothen the progress of the election proceedings, to remove the obstacles therein or to preserve a vital piece of evidence, if the same would be lost or destroyed or rendered irretrievable by the time the results are declared and stage is set for invoking the jurisdiction of the Court. In the case of Shaji K. Joseph (Supra.) as has been cited on behalf of the respondent no. 10, the issue was that the nomination paper of a candidate was rejected which was challenged before the writ court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it would not be proper for the courts to entertain election dispute when the election process has started. However, in the present case, the issue is that primarily due to the obstacle regarding finalisation of voter list, there has been tussle between two factions of the waqf committee due to which law and order problem is likely to arise. 15. Before parting with the case, it is also observed that the respondent no. 1 is required to take sincere step to provide appropriate infrastructure to the Waqf Tribunal so as to enable it to discharge its statutory function in terms with the provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995 in future. 9. Thus in the aforesaid case also, there was dispute between the two factions of the Anjuman Islamia Waqf relating to the preparation of the voter list. In the said case, this court, after having gone through the relevant provisions of the Act, 1995, in a specific term, held that all the dispute pertaining to Waqf should be filed before the Waqf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act, 1995 and such dispute should not be raised by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, this court entertained the said writ petition treating it as an exceptional case so as to facilitate the election process particularly in view of the fact that the said Tribunal was not functional in the State of Jharkhand at that time. However, this court entertained the said writ petition treating it as an exceptional case so as to facilitate the election process particularly in view of the fact that the said Tribunal was not functional in the State of Jharkhand at that time. In the said case this court had also shown its annoyance towards inaction of the State Government in not providing infrastructure for constituting the Tribunal and had observed that the High Courts in India are already tottering and reeling under the burden of massive arrears which have flooded the dockets of the Courts and as such if the inter-se dispute of the Waqf Committees is entertained, the same will further burden the writ courts. This court had specifically observed in the said judgment that the State of Jharkhand should take sincere step to provide appropriate infrastructure to the Waqf Tribunal. 10. In the present case, this court, vide order dated 14.06.2022, directed the respondent no. 2 to file personal affidavit on the point as to whether the Jharkhand State Sunni Waqf Board and the Waqf Tribunal are functional in the State of Jharkhand. In compliance of the said order, the respondent no.2 has filed counter affidavit dated 23.06.2022 stating that Jharkhand State Sunni Waqf Board is not functional since 17.10.2019 and a proposal for reconstitution of the Board is still pending before the competent authority of the State Government. It has further been stated in the said counter affidavit that three-members Jharkhand State Waqf Tribunal was formed vide departmental notification no. 2132 dated 25.06.2019, however one member from State Administrative Service has been transferred and the appointment of third member is also in process vide advertisement dated 16.06.2022. The respondent no. 2 in the counter affidavit dated 23.06.2022 filed in W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022, has not specifically stated as to whether the quorum of the Waqf Tribunal is complete with the appointment of only the Chairman in the same. None of the learned counsel appearing for the parties have submitted that the quorum of the Tribunal is complete. Thus, this Court has reason to believe that the quorum in the Tribunal is not complete and is presently non-functional. 11. The conduct of the respondent-State appears to be in complete violation of the order of this court passed in the case of Federal Anjuman Islamia (supra). Thus, this Court has reason to believe that the quorum in the Tribunal is not complete and is presently non-functional. 11. The conduct of the respondent-State appears to be in complete violation of the order of this court passed in the case of Federal Anjuman Islamia (supra). The State has not shown promptness in filling the posts of required members of the Waqf Tribunal due to which the situation has remained the same as existed during filing of the earlier writ petitions. This time also, the writ petitions have been preferred raising the dispute with respect to voter list of the said Waqf. The purpose of constitution of different Tribunals by the legislature is to create a specialized adjudicatory body for speedy disposal of the disputes as also to reduce the workload of the constitutional courts. However, if the State does not perform its statutory duty by filling up the posts of the members of the Tribunal as soon as the same get vacant, the very purpose of the statutory scheme goes redundant. The State authorities must initiate the process of appointment of the members of Tribunals in anticipation of transfer/retirement of the existing members so as to continuously maintain their quorum. 12. Reverting back to the present case. Thrust of the argument of Mr. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, is that the election committee especially the respondent no.6 and 7 have committed several infirmities while preparing the voter list. Mr. Sinha has pointed out that female members and bonafide donors have not been included in the voter list in contravention of the provisions of the Bye-laws. He has further pointed out that in spite of the written complaint made by several persons, no “Akshep Committee” was constituted by the respondent no.6 which is in violation of clause-21 of the Bye-laws of the Waqf. On the other hand, the respondent nos. 6 and 7 have though denied allegation of any irregularity in preparation of the voter list, yet have not stated that “Akshep Committee” has been constituted by them so as to decide such complaints. 13. On the other hand, the respondent nos. 6 and 7 have though denied allegation of any irregularity in preparation of the voter list, yet have not stated that “Akshep Committee” has been constituted by them so as to decide such complaints. 13. To appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the parties, I have perused clause-21 of the Bye-laws which provides that any complaint regarding the election shall not be made in any Government Court, rather the same shall be made before the Election Convener who shall constitute a five-members “Akshep Committee” headed by such Advocate from Muslim community who is not a member of “Majlis-a-Muntizma”, two members shall be appointed by the person who raises objection and rest two members shall be appointed by the election convener. The contention of learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 and 7 is that no complaint has yet been received by the respondent no. 6 and any complaint made before the State agencies is in contravention of clause- 21 of the Bye-laws. 14. I find no substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 and 7. The respondent no. 8 had issued letter to the respondent no. 6 on 03.06.2022 with respect to the application of “Survey India Group” alleging irregularity in preparing the voter list and as such the respondent no.6 was required to constitute “Akshep Committee” for verifying the allegation made in the complaint. However, he failed to perform his duty as mandated under clause- 21 of the Bye-laws. 15. So far the contention of learned senior counsel for the petitioners that no female member has been included in the voter list, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 6 and 7 in W.P.(C) No. 2044 of 2022, has tried to justify the said decision submitting that the Bye-laws is silent regarding inclusion of female voters and as such the Committee has decided not to include any female member in the voter list. 16. I also do not find any substance in the said argument of the learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and 7. Since the Bye-laws do not specifically debar female voters, the decision of the Committee not to include female members in the voter list or to allow them to participate in the election is an arbitrary action. 16. I also do not find any substance in the said argument of the learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and 7. Since the Bye-laws do not specifically debar female voters, the decision of the Committee not to include female members in the voter list or to allow them to participate in the election is an arbitrary action. Bye-laws specifically provides that every ‘Dawami’ member, ‘Mohsin’ or ‘Wakfin’ will have the voting right in the election of the Waqf. The respondent nos. 6 and 7 have though failed to show that only male members are entitled to vote in the election, however have claimed that in absence of any clear stipulation in the Bye-laws that female members shall also have voting right, they have not been included in the voter list. This court is of the considered view that every person who is ‘Dawami’ member, ‘Mohsin’ or ‘Wakfin’ has the voting right irrespective of gender. It is surprising that in the present era of gender equality where women are equally contributing to the development of the nation, the election committee of said Waqf is making meaningless interpretation of the Bye-laws just to debar the female members from voting in the election of the said Waqf. 17. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of this Court is summarized as under: (i) Since the Jharkhand State Sunni Waqf Board is not functional, the respondent no. 8 shall supervise the process of election of Anjuman Islamia Waqf. (ii) The respondent no. 8 shall constitute “Aakshep Committee” in accordance with the Bye-laws within two weeks from the date of passing of the order consisting of five members having fair and undisputed image and the said committee shall finalize the voter list within two weeks from the date of its constitution after inviting and deciding the objections, if any. (iii) The respondent no. 8 may seek assistance of the district administration as and when required and the respondent no. 3 shall ensure that due assistance is given to the respondent no. 8 particularly to maintain proper law and order during the election process. (iv) The female members of the Waqf shall also be included in the voter list. (v) The entire process of election shall be finalized within three weeks (21 days) from the date of finalization of the voter list. 8 particularly to maintain proper law and order during the election process. (iv) The female members of the Waqf shall also be included in the voter list. (v) The entire process of election shall be finalized within three weeks (21 days) from the date of finalization of the voter list. (vi) Since the State-authorities have failed to discharge their duty of appointing required members of the Waqf Tribunal with promptness, due to which this Court has to again entertain the present writ petitions despite specific direction given in the case of Federal Anjuman Islamia (supra), a cost of Rs.10,000/- is imposed upon them for such an inaction to be deposited in favour of Advocates’ Association Welfare & Development Fund, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi, within two weeks. 18. Before parting with the case, this Court would like to add that in future, it shall be the bounden duty of any Committee of the Waqf to commence the process of election three months before its expiration and all the exercises including preparation of the voter list, constitution of “Akshep Committee” for deciding any complaint regarding election process as well as final voting shall be completed within the said period, strictly in accordance with the Bye-laws. The respondent-State of Jharkhand is further directed to ensure that the quorum of the Waqf Tribunal remains complete and the same is not left vacant/non-functional for a considerable period. 19. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.