JUDGMENT/ORDER 1. The petitioner, claiming to be the President of the Central Majlis-e-Shura Jamia Masjid, Kunigal ('the Masjid' for short), is before this Court calling in question demand notice dated 19-02- 2022 issued by the 1st respondent under Sec. 48 of the Waqf Act, 1995 ('the Act' for short). 2. Heard Sri. Shahbaaz Husain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. S.R.Anuradha, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Sri. S.A.Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 5, Sri. N.Moinuddin, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Smt. Shwetha Krishnappa, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.6. 3. Sans details, facts in brief, are as follows:- The 1st respondent/Karnataka State Board of Auqaf ('the Board' for short) constitutes a Managing Committee for the management of Masjid for a period of three years. The Board directs the Auqaf institution to carry out annual audit by Chartered Accountants. The Masjid then appoints an external auditor to submit its report to the Board. The Board without even bringing it to the notice of the petitioner appointed an Administrator to the Auqaf and claims to have forcibly evicted the petitioner from the position. The communication between the Board and the petitioner go on till the petitioner assumes the post of President of the Auqaf Committee. What is called in question in the case at hand is a demand notice being issued for recovery of Rs.1, 32, 35, 250.00 from the hands of the petitioner based upon the audit report. The demand notice is issued under Sec. 48 of the Act. The petitioner is knocking at the doors of this Court on the ground that the said demand notice issued under Sec. 48 is contrary to law, inasmuch as it is contrary to Sec. 47 of the Act. This Court interdicted further proceedings by grant of an interim order and the same is in subsistence even as on date. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would urge a solitary contention that the demand notice under Sec. 48 of the Act is a product of the audit report purportedly made under Sec. 47 of the Act but is contrary to Sec. 47 and, therefore the very audit report is without jurisdiction and if the audit report is without jurisdiction, the demand notice is a nullity in law. The learned counsel seeks to place reliance upon Sec. 47 of the Act to contend that only those Chartered Accountants appointed by Government can function as auditors and if it is not a panel of the State Government, the very submission of the report becomes without jurisdiction and therefore, seeks quashment of entire proceedings. 5. The learned senior counsel representing the Board would refute the submission to contend that Government had issued a notification on 12/12/2013 amending certain Regulations framed under the Act for the functioning of the Board; that the auditors appointed to do the task of auditing were all from the panel of the State Government and one of the auditor was appointed by the Board. She would contend that if Government has approved the list of auditors once, then it would not be necessary for the Board to repeatedly seek approval at the hands of State Government. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 7. The issue in the lis lies in a narrow compass as challenge is the demand notice issued to the petitioner under Sec. 48 of the Act. For a demand to be issued under Sec., 48 audit of accounts under Sec. 47 has to take place. Therefore, it is germane to notice the provisions of Secs. 47 and 48 of the Act and they read as follows:- "47. Audit of accounts of auqaf. For a demand to be issued under Sec., 48 audit of accounts under Sec. 47 has to take place. Therefore, it is germane to notice the provisions of Secs. 47 and 48 of the Act and they read as follows:- "47. Audit of accounts of auqaf. -(1) The accounts of auqaf submitted to the Board under Sec. 46 shall be audited and examined in the following manner, namely: - (a) in the case of a waqf having no income or a net annual income not exceeding fifty thousand rupees, the submission of a statement of accounts shall be a sufficient compliance with the provisions of Sec. 46 and the accounts of two per cent of such auqaf shall be audited annually by an auditor appointed by the Board; (b) the accounts of the waqf having net annual income exceeding fifty thousand rupees shall be audited annually, or at such other intervals as may be prescribed, by an auditor appointed by the Board from out of the panel of auditors prepared by the State Government and while drawing up such panel of auditors, the State Government shall specify the scale of remuneration of auditors; (c) the State Government may under intimation to the Board, at any time cause the account of any waqf audited by the State Examiner of Local Funds or by any other officer designated for that purpose by that State Government; (2) The auditor shall submit his report to the Board and the report of the auditor shall among other things, specify all cases of irregular, illegal or improper expenditure or of failure to recover money or other property caused by neglect or misconduct and any other matter which the auditor considers it necessary to report; and the report shall also contain the name of any person who, in the opinion of the auditor, is responsible for such expenditure or failure and the auditor shall in every such case certify the amount of such expenditure or loss as due from such person. (3) The cost of the audit of the accounts of a waqf shall be met from the funds of that waqf: Provided that the remuneration of the auditors appointed from out of the panel drawn by the State Government in relation to auqaf having a net annual income of more than fifty thousand rupees shall be paid in accordance with the scale of remuneration specified by the State Government under clause (c) of sub-sec. (1): Provided further that where the audit of the accounts of any waqf is made by the State Examiner of Local Funds or any other officer designated by the State Government in this behalf, the cost of such audit shall not exceed one and a half per cent of the net annual income of such waqf and such costs shall be met from the funds of the auqaf concerned. 48. Board to pass orders on auditor's report. -(1) The Board shall examine the auditor's report, and may call for the explanation of any person in regard to any matter mentioned therein, and shall pass such orders as it thinks fit including orders for the recovery of the amount certified by the auditor under sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 47. (2) The mutawalli or any other person aggrieved by any order made by the Board may, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the order, apply to the Tribunal to modify or set aside the order and the Tribunal may, after taking such evidence as it may think necessary, confirm or modify the order or remit the amount so certified, either in whole or in part, and may also make such order as to costs as it may think appropriate in the circumstances of the case. (3) No application made under sub-sec. (2) shall be entertained by the Tribunal unless the amount certified by the auditor under sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 47 has first been deposited in the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall not have any power to stay the operation of the order made by the Board under sub-sec. (1). (4) The order made by the Tribunal under sub-sec. (2) shall be final. (5) Every amount for the recovery of which any order has been made under sub-sec. (1) or sub-sec. (1). (4) The order made by the Tribunal under sub-sec. (2) shall be final. (5) Every amount for the recovery of which any order has been made under sub-sec. (1) or sub-sec. (2) shall, where such amount remains unpaid, be recoverable in the manner specified in Sec. 34 or Sec. 35 as if the said order were an order for the recovery of any amount determined under subsec. (3) of Sec. 35." (Emphasis supplied) Sec. 47 deals with auditing of accounts of auqaf. Sec. 47(1)(b) mandates that if the net annual income of a auqaf is more than Rs.50, 000.00 it shall be audited annually by an auditor appointed by the Board from out of the panel of auditors prepared by the State Government and while drawing up such panel of auditors, the State Government shall specify the scale of remuneration of such auditors. The report of the auditors results in an order being passed by the Board under Sec. 48 of the Act. The clause that is applicable in Sec. 47 of the Act at hand is clause (b) of subsec. (1) of Sec. 47 of the Act. It is admitted that annual income of auqaf is more than Rs.50, 000.00. Therefore, it is required to be audited in tune with clause (b) of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 47. The members of the audit party are to be from out of the panel of auditors prepared by the State Government. 8. The bone of contention is that audit is done not from the panel prepared by the State Government but by the Board itself. The State Government issued a Notification amending the Karnataka State Waqf (Amendment) Regulations, 2013 depicting qualification and other criteria for appointment to the posts under the Waqf Board in terms of the Karnataka State Wakf Board Cadre and Recruitment Rules. In terms of the said Notification a written examination was conducted for recruitment to the posts in the Waqf Board. The auditors were also selected. The appointment of auditors to the Board comes about on 3/8/2015. The order appointing auditors reads as follows: "KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS Sub: Appointment of Auditors in the establishment of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf. The auditors were also selected. The appointment of auditors to the Board comes about on 3/8/2015. The order appointing auditors reads as follows: "KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS Sub: Appointment of Auditors in the establishment of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf. Preamble: As per the approved Cadre and Recruitment Rules of the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf and permission of the Government to fill up the vacancies, the Department of Public Instructions (Centralized Admission Cell) was entrusted to conduct the competitive exams for recruitment to various vacant posts in Board. The Board of Public Instructions, (Centralized Admission Cell) has conducted the competitive exams and submitted the list of qualified candidates. Hence this order. ORDER No.KSBW/ADM/EST/CR/458/2014-15 dtd.: 3/8/2015 In view of the above and subject to verification of Police Authorities, verification of qualifying academic certificates, the following candidates are hereby appointed as Auditors in the establishment of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf in the pay scale of Rs.14550.00350-15600-400-17200-450-19000-50021000- 600-24600-700-26700 and allowance admissible as per rules of the Board on the following terms and conditions: .... .... ...." The preamble to the order is that the Department of Public Instructions in the Centralized Admission Cell was entrusted with the conduct competitive examination for recruitment to various vacant posts in the Board and the Department submitted a list of qualified candidates. In tune with what was submitted by the Department, auditors were named, two of whom appointed as auditors find their names in the said order dtd. 3/8/2015. This, in the considered view of this Court, cannot be termed to be contrary to Sec. 47 of the Act, as the very appointment of these auditors is by the Government. Therefore, they became panel auditors of Government and two of whom are chosen by the Board from among the panel of these auditors. Their pay scale is already fixed at the time of their selection by Government. Therefore, insofar as two of them are concerned they are auditors who are from Government. One more auditor is appointed from out of the panel of the Board. But, all the appointments are made by the Board as they are required to be made by the Board. The only rider is that they should be from the panel that the State Government has approved. Therefore, the appointment of auditors is within the power under Sec. 47 of the Act. But, all the appointments are made by the Board as they are required to be made by the Board. The only rider is that they should be from the panel that the State Government has approved. Therefore, the appointment of auditors is within the power under Sec. 47 of the Act. Much emphasis is laid by the learned counsel for the petitioner towards the communication from the Board to the Government to contend that the auditors are appointed by the Board and not from the panel of Government. That communication is only seeking an approval at the hands of the Government for the auditors to be appointed to conduct annual audit. This cannot mean that all the auditors are appointed by the Board but not from out of the panel of Government. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is thus rendered unacceptable. 9. What results from an audit under Sec. 47 of the Act is the impugned demand notice. Therefore, it is always open to the petitioner to knock at the doors of the jurisdictional Waqf Tribunal against any order that is to be passed by the Board under the Act. 10. Finding the act being within the power available under Sec. 47 of the Act, the petition being devoid of merit, would necessarily meet its rejection and is accordingly done. The petition is thus rejected. Consequently, pending applications also stand disposed.