Delhi HC asks Waqf Board to file separate plea to challenge Centre's decision to delist 123 properties
Feb 22, 2023
New Delhi [India], February 22 : The Delhi High Court Wednesday refused to pass an interim order on the plea of the Delhi Waqf Board. However, the High Court asked the Board to file a separate petition to challenge the central government's decision to delist the 123 Waqf properties.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri on Wednesday refused to pass an interim order on the application. The Court asked Delhi Waqf Board to file a separate plea.
The court has listed the earlier petition filed on August 4 for further hearing.
Delhi Waqf Board had recently moved an application through advocate Wajeeh Safiq in an ongoing matter challenging the Centre's decision.
Delhi Waqf Board chairman Amanatullah Khan said 123 properties have been with the Waqf Board for a long and the Centre was bypassing the law and courts in trying to "occupy it forcibly".
The plea moved by the Board sought a direction, thereby directing the central government to supply the petitioner's report of May 15, 2017 of the One Man Committee setup on May 19, 2016.
It also sought a direction quashing all the decisions and actions taken by the central government and all its other departments in respect of the report of the One Man Committee.
The petitioner sought a direction directing the centre to take fresh decision on the report submitted by One Man Committee after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to make submissions in respect of the aforesaid report.
It also sought a direction quashing the alienation/disposal/allotment of the Waqf graveyard known as Qadimi Qabristan, South Inderpat, Mathura Road comprised in Khasra no 484, village Inderpat, Mathura Road, Delhi or any portion thereof by the Union of India in favour of Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) or anyone.
The petitioner stated that the Centre appointed Two Members Committee in violation of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as, neither the report of the previously appointed One Member Committee has been shared with the Delhi Waqf Board nor the reason and the process undertaken for rejecting the report of the One Member Committee has been shared with the Delhi Waqf Board.
It is also contended that between the appointment of One Member Committee and the subsequent Two Members Committee, the Centre has allotted one of these 123 Waqf Properties on a permanent basis to ITBP, thereby meddling with the subject matter of the present Two Member Committee.
