Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has requested a response from the Delhi government regarding a petition urging the establishment of tribunal to handle disputes concerning Waqf properties under the Waqf Act. Justice Subramonium Prasad has directed the government to submit its reply and scheduled further consideration of the case for July.
The petition before the High Court was lodged by Masjid and Dargah Abdul Salam, situated in the Connaught Place area. It contends that the tribunal, mandated by Section 84 of the Waqf Act, has not been operational since April 2022.
According to the petition, the tribunal’s last functioning member, an Additional District Judge, was transferred from the Waqf tribunal to another court in April 2022. Despite the assumption of duty by another member of the State Judicial Service, the tribunal’s operation has ceased due to the absence of a requisite notification, as informed to the Court.
“However, the respondent no.1’s [Delhi government’s] apathy is manifest from the fact that the respondent no.1 did not issue the requisite Notification under Section 83 (1) of the Waqf Act, 1995. Consequently, the learned Waqf Tribunal continued to suffer from the defect, i.e., absence of Notification,” the petition explained.
It added that the failure of the Delhi government to issue the requisite notification not only contributed to the increased pendency of disputes before the Waqf Tribunal but also increases the burden on the High Court as litigants who want urgent interim relief have to approach the High Court.
“The petitioner [Masjid and Dargah Abdul Salam] is party to various litigations before the learned Waqf Tribunal involving the portions of the Waqf premises under reference. However, for want of Notification as required under Section 83 (1) of the Waqf Act, 1995, the trial of all those suits has abruptly come to a grinding halt, which causes serious injury to the petitioner,” the plea added.
Advocate Wajeeh Shafiq appeared for the petitioner and argued the case. The writ petition has been filed by advocate Mudassar Jahan Faridi.
