Telangana State Waqf Board’s claim to ownership of land where Hotel Marriot in Hyderabad faced a setback as the Telangana High Court dismissed their appeal. The court, led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti, issued a writ of prohibition against the Waqf Board, stating that their actions exceeded the limits of their jurisdiction.
What is the case:
The case involves a dispute over the title of land situated in Kavadiguda Village, Hyderabad, where the famed 5 star Hotel Marriot stands.
This land, initially sold to two individuals in 1963, has been the subject of multiple claims by the Waqf Board alleging it as Waqf property. Despite earlier determinations that the land is not Waqf property, the Waqf Board persistently pursued claims against the landowners. This led to legal proceedings, including civil suits and writ petitions, spanning several decades.
The landowners contested the Waqf Board’s claims, highlighting previous court decisions and transactions confirming their ownership. The case involves scrutiny of various legal provisions, including those under the Waqf Act of 1954 and 1995. Additionally, the case involves challenges to notifications issued by the Waqf Board, particularly an addendum notification in 2007, which sought to amend earlier gazette notifications. The legal dispute culminated in the filing of a writ petition challenging the Waqf Board’s actions, including the initiation of proceedings for eviction.
First Round: In 1958, the Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board conducted an enquiry and determined that the property was not Waqf property.
Second Round: In 1964, Abdul Gafoor filed a civil suit claiming the property as Waqf. However, the court returned the plaint due to procedural issues.
Third Round: In 1966, the Waqf Board issued a show cause notice to the property owners, which was challenged in court. The court quashed the proceedings, citing a previous determination that the property was not Waqf.
Fourth Round: In 1998, the Waqf Board issued a notice claiming the property as Waqf, but no further action was taken after a reply from the property owners.
Fifth Round: In 2005, another notice was issued by the Waqf Board, prompting a detailed representation from the property owners asserting that the property was not Waqf.
Sixth Round: In 2007, an addendum to a Gazette Notification was issued, amending the description of the property to include it as Waqf. This action was challenged in court.
Seventh Round: In 2014, the Waqf Board initiated a proceeding seeking eviction of the property owners from the subject property. This led to the filing of a writ petition challenging the action of the Waqf Board.
In the order, the court stated, “Successive attempts by the Waqf Board to claim the subject property as Waqf property are evident, despite the Board’s own determination back on 05.10.1958 under Section 27 of the 1954 Act, confirming that the subject property is not Waqf property.”
In conclusion, it said, ”In view of the preceding analysis, the addendum notification dated 23.08.2007 published by the Waqf Board in relation to the property of the petitioners is hereby quashed, and a writ of prohibition is issued directing the respondents not to proceed further in on the file of the Waqf Tribunal and a proceeding under Section 54 of the 1995 Act.”
In January 2017, former CM K Chandrashekar Rao promised to introduce a Bill in the Assembly to give judicial powers to the Telangana State Waqf Board.
https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/190117/telangana-set-to-give-judicial-powers-to-waqf-board.html
In 2020, Telangana government mulling on giving judicial powers to Waqf Board
Telangana government mulling on giving judicial powers to Wakf Board https://t.co/PqR3fmrC2P
— Telangana Today (@TelanganaToday) September 9, 2020
In 2018, Telangana Congress released a manifesto promising to give judicial powers Waqf Board.
https://www.indiatvnews.com/elections/telangana-assembly-elections-judicial-powers-to-waqf-board-if-Congress-comes-to-power-in-telangana-487144
In 2022, Tamil NaduWaqf Board claims ownership of a Hindu majority Thiruchenthurai village.
Tamil Nadu: #Waqf Board claims ownership of a #Hindu majority Thiruchenthurai village.
The issue was uncovered when a Hindu man attempted to sell his land, he was told to take NOC from Waqf Board as the land did not belong to him & instead belonged to Board. pic.twitter.com/Qs9jhKxNpz
— Organiser Weekly (@eOrganiser) September 14, 2022
In 2014, the UPA cleared and approved the handover 123 prime properties in Delhi to Waqf board
Cabinet gives 123 prime properties in Delhi to Wakf board http://t.co/whoKpvorMi The clerics have been obliged to ensure Muslim vote.
— Amit Malviya (@amitmalviya) March 3, 2014
In this case, Dr. Shashidhar, VHP Telangana, Joint General secretary, speaking to the Organiser, said “This case shows how Muslim organisations under the garb of Waqf are trying to encroach the lands of individuals. Land encroachment is a violation of fundamental rights in utilising the titled lands or threatening them to surrender.”
He added that “Partition of Bharat happened due to Islamic separatism, and the formation of Pakistan was the result, and since then we have witnessed how the lost land is being used to attack Bharat and its interests since then. Even after Bharat, the Muslim League party continue to raise slogans of “Lad ke liya hai Pakistan, Hans ke lenge Hindustan”. The attempt to occupy the Marriot Hotel in Hyderabad is one such case.”
The issue of land encroachment cases involving Waqf Boards across the country is indeed a concerning phenomenon. Such cases often highlight a misuse of legal provisions, resulting in the occupation of lands that rightfully belong to religious trusts. This not only undermines the constitutional rights of these trusts but also disrupts the intended purpose of these lands.
The misuse of power by certain Waqf Boards, sometimes in collusion with favorable governments, to manipulate laws and regulations to their advantage is a mockery of justice and truth. It not only erodes public trust but also perpetuates injustice against the rightful owners of these lands.
