Affidavit copy of The Ad-hoc Board of Administrators, Nagore Dargah Interim Ad-hoc Administrators, Nagore Dargah, Nagore – 611 022. Nagapattinam District. .. Appellant.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.A. No. 327 of 2022

The Ad-hoc Board of Administrators,
Nagore Dargah Interim Ad-hoc Administrators,
Nagore Dargah, Nagore – 611 022.
Nagapattinam District. .. Appellant.
-Vs-
1. Muhalli Muthavalli
H. Haja Nazimuddin Sahib,
S/o. Muhalli Muthavalli S.M. Hassan Mohideen Sahib,
No.7, Manavara North Street,
Nagore – 611 002,
Nagapattinam District.

2. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,
Rep. By its Chief Executive Officer,
No.1, Jaffer Syrang Street,
Mannady, Chennai – 600 001. .. Respondents.

AFFIDAVIT OF K. ALLAUDIN & S.F.AKBAR

We, (i) K. Allaudin, S/o. Kader Mohideen, Muslim, aged 69 years, residing at. No. 31, First Street, “H” Block, 12th Main Road, Anna Nagar West, Chennai – 600 040 and (ii) S.F. Akbar son of Fakkir Mohideen, Muslim, aged 71 years, residing at Door No. 24, Plot No. 4, Fathima Akbar Villa, Pillaiyar Koil 4th Cross Street, Ramappa Nagar, Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096 do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:-

Page No.1
Corrs.

-2-

1. We submit that, we are the appellants in the above Writ Appeal. We are filing this affidavit apropos the order dated 23.02.2022 in W.A. No. 327 of 2022. We are personally acquainted with the facts deposed hereunder.

2. We submit that, we were required by the Hon’ble Division Bench as to whether we were willing to act as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators, Nagore Dargah. Nagore Dargah being an acclaimed Dargah in India we deemed it an honor when the Hon’ble Division Bench sought our consent and we accordingly consented to administer the Dargah as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators.

3. We submit that, we were appointed as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators by order dated 10.2.2017 in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 Batch for a period of 4 months. We assumed charge as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators on 23.02.2017. The order elaborately deals with our responsibilities and Paragraph 7 of the order is as follows:
“We make it very clear that in no legal proceedings, without the express permission of this Court, no order which is capable of neutralizing the order we have now passed is liable to be passed or entertained.”
Page No.2

Corrs.

-3-

4. We submit that, by order dated 10.7.2017, the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to extend the term of our office till the disposal of the cases. The order is as follows:

“After hearing this preliminary submission made by the respective learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the term of office of the Committee appointed by this Court, vide order dated 10.2.2017, is to be extended till the disposal of these batch of cases”.

5. We submit that, again by order dated 4.9.2017, the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to pass order regarding payment of honorarium.

6. We submit that, final orders were passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in W.A. Nos. 1640 of 2016 Batch on 8.6.2018.

7. We submit that the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to reverse the order of the lower Court and held that the Wakf Board replaces the Scheme

Page No.3
Corrs.
-4-

Court namely Principal District Court, Nagapattinam. Paragraphs 46(1) and 46(2) of the order dated 8.6.2018 are as follows:

“46.1 To sum up, even where the Courts have framed a scheme under Sec. 92 CPC for the administration of the Wakf on the establishment of Wakf Board, the residual power of superintendence of the Wakfs which hither to remained with the Court as the conscience keeper of the public trusts founded on the principle of parents patriae would shift from the Scheme Court to the Wakf Board. In effect, the Wakf Board replaces the Principal District Court, Nagapattinam, in administering the Scheme settled in O.S. 30 of 1946. However, its power of superintendence stops on determination of surplus income meant for the kasupangudars. The authorities which the counsel for the Wakf Board has cited and listed in paragraph 32 above may be referred to. One immediate effect is that the Wakf Board cannot claim contribution in relation to the surplus fund meant for distribution to the Kasupangudars.”

46.2. The conclusion is to make a formal statement: That the Wakf Board succeeds both in CRP No. 938 of 2010 and W.P. 7809 of 2010.”
Page No.4
Corrs.
-5-

8. We submit that the Hon’ble Division Bench further held that the Civil Court alone has competence to decide the successor to the office of 8th Trustee and directed the Sub Court, Nagapattinam to dispose of OS No. 31/2014 pending on the file of Sub Court, Nagapattinam within a period of 6 months. We were ordered to continue in office till the disposal of the suit by the Civil Court. Paragraph 47 of the order is as follows:

“Since this Court has held that only the Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide on the successor to the office of the eighth trustee, it directs that the Subordinate Judges Court, Nagapattinam, to dispose of O.S. 31 of 2014 pending on its file within six months from today. The Ad-hoc Board of Administrators would continue till then and work with the Wakf Board. In view of the findings of this Court, the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators are directed to submit all their reports to Wakf Board. The Registry is also directed to forward all the reports of the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators filed before this Court to the Wakf Board.”

Page No.5
Corrs.

-6-

9. We submit that Special Leave Petitions came to be filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the final order dated 08/06/2018 in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 Batch. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to pass the following order on 30.11.2018 in Civil SLP (Civil) Diary (S) No. 39558/2018.
“Delay condoned.

Application for exemption from filing official translation is allowed.
Issue notice

Until further orders, status quo, as of today shall be maintained by the parties.”

10. We submit that in Contempt Petition No. 3107/2016 in WP No. 33181/2016 by order dated 03/12/2019 a Learned Single Judge of this Hon’ble Court was pleased to record the terms of settlement between 4 persons regarding succession to the office of 8th Trustee and passed orders permitting them to succeed to the office of the 8th Trustee on rotation basis.

11. We submit that L.P.A.No.1 of 2020 has been filed against the order in Contempt Petition No. 3107/2016 dated 03/12/2019. The Hon’ble Division
Page No.6
Corrs.
-7-

Bench was pleased to admit L.P.A.No.1 of 2020 and by order dated 20.12.2019 stayed the order passed in Contempt Petition No. 3107/2016. Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of the said order in CMP No. 151/2020 in LPA No.1/2020 are as follows:

“4. Once an order of status quo is granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this court is of the prima facie view that nothing can be done in respect of Para 47 of the above said common judgment. That apart, it is yet to be brought to the knowledge of this Court that at the time of withdrawal of O.S. No. 31 of 2014, whether all parties were put on notice, especially the petitioner/7the defendant in O.S. No. 31 of 2014 and plaintiff in O.S. No. 26 of 2016 on the file of the Sub Court, Nagapattinam, and in any event, O.S.No.26 of 2016 is pending adjudication and it is to be noted at this juncture that, while advancing arguments in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 etc., none of the parties has brought to the notice of this Court as to the pendency of the said suit in O.S No. 26 of 2016 and the three parties who had participated in the mediation are party defendants in O.S. No. 26 of 2016.

Page No.7
Corrs.
-8-

5. In the light of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has made a prima facie case for grant of interim orders. Hence, there shall be an order of ad interim stay till 23.01.2020.

6. This Court also clarifies that the order of ad-interim stay made in this Letters Patent Appeal is confined only to the dispute raised by the petitioner and the 1st respondent and the order closing the contempt petition is not revived and also not stayed”. The interim order stands extended till the final disposal of L.P.A. No. 1 of 2020.

12. We submit that the Wakf Board also filed L.P.A.No.3 of 2020 against the order in Contempt Petition No.3107 of 2016. By order dated 23.1.2020 in CMP No. 1234 of 2020 in L.P.A. No. 3 of 2020 this Hon’ble Court was pleased to stay the order passed in Contempt Petition No.3107 of 2016 and Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the order are as follows:-

“3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made a legal plea
Page No.8
Corrs.

-9-

by submitting that as per Section 32(2) (g) read with Section 69 of the Wakf Act, the Wakf Board alone is competent to modify the scheme and under the garb of mediatory process, the above cited statutory powers of the Wakf Board sought to be interfered and taken away and hence prays for interim order.

4. This Court, after hearing the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and on going through the materials as well as relevant provisions of Wakf Act, is of the view that a prima facie case has been made out for grant of interim order. Hence there shall be an order of ad interim stay till 12.02.2020”. The interim order stands extended till the final disposal of LPA No.3 of 2020”.

13. We submit that, further, on 28.2.2020 the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to pass the following order in SLP (C) No.31951-31961/2018

“ We are informed that during the pendency of these special leave petitions, a contempt petition was filed before the High Court, in which the
Page No.9
Corrs.
-10-

High Court had directed the parties to explore possibility of settlement by mediation process and nominated Justice Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifula, former Judge of this Court, Justice K.N. Basha and Justice G.M. Akbar Ali, former Judges of Madras High Court. That mediation process has been concluded and settlement terms are also drawn between the parties. However, that settlement has been made the subject matter of challenge before the Division Bench of the High Court in Letter Patents Appeal Nos. 1/2020 and 3/2020.

Further, some interim order has also been passed by the High Court in the said appeals. Resultantly, we grant liberty to the parties to approach the High Court for modification or vacation of the interim order including to decide the appeals finally and expeditiously. The request be considered by the High Court appropriately on its own merits in accordance with law uninfluenced by the fact that present special leave petitions are pending or interim relief has been granted by this Court. As a matter of fact, if the settlement is allowed to be given effect to in those appeals, it is possible that some of the issues raised in the present special leave petitions may not survive for consideration.”
Page No.10
Corrs.
-11-

14. We submit that, SLP(C) No. (S) 6406-6407/2021 came to be filed against the interim order dated 03.05.2021 in LPA No. 3/2020 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India was pleased to pass the following orders:

“ Issue Notice.
Tag with Special Leave Petition (C) No. 31959-31961 of 2018.
Until further orders, status quo, as of today, shall be maintained by the parties.”

15. Thus we have been in office as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators from 23.2.2017 on the basis of orders passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

16. We submit that, with due apology, we pray to this Hon’ble Court to permit us to state as to why we filed the Writ Appeal and what our grievance is.

Page No.11
Corrs.

-12-

17. We submit that, till 08.06.2018, the Scheme Court was District Court, Nagapattinam. We were submitting reports before this Hon’ble Court.

18. We submit that, by final order dated 08.06.2018 in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 batch, the Hon’ble Division Bench held that, the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board replaces the Scheme Court and we should thereafter work with the Wakf Board as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators till the disposal of the suit and that we should send our reports to the Wakf Board.

19. We submit that, in view of the Status Quo order dated 30.11.2018 ordered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and order dated 20.12.2019 in LPA No. 1 of 2020, paragraph 47 of the Division Bench order in W.A.No.1640 of 2016 batch cannot be given effect to.

20. We submit that, whether the direction given by the Hon’ble Division Bench to work with the Wakf Board would apply or we have to continue to administer the Dargah as Ad-hoc Board of Administrators as on 07.06.2018 is

Page No.12
Corrs.
-13-

to be decided only by this Hon’ble Court. Moreover, after the order dated 28.02.2020 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 31959-31961 of 2018, there is another order dated 03.05.2021 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 6406-6407 of 2021 ordering “Status Quo”.

21. We submit that, the Wakf Board had been intermeddling with the day-to-day administration of the Dargah after 08.06.2018. We had sent several communications to the Wakf Board in this regard.

22. We submit that, the problem became very acute after the order passed in W.P. No. 25964 of 2021. The Writ Petition was filed by a newly formed society to allow their members to help the police in crowd management during Urs Festival. We rejected their representation on 15.12.2021. The Writ Petition is for a Mandamus directing the respondent therein namely 1. The Ad-hoc Board of Administrators, 2. The Manager, 3. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board and 4. The Superintendent of Police to consider three representations to allow

Page No.13
Corrs.
-14-

the members of the society to work as volunteers in the annual Urs Festival 2022.

23. We submit that, the learned judge was pleased to dispose of the Writ Petition on 09.12.2021 at the admission stage itself. We may be permitted to read and rely on the said order as part of this affidavit.

24. We submit that, the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators and the Manager of the Dargah came to know of the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court only after the manager of the Dargah received a notice from the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board on 15.12.2021.

25. We submit that, the counsel for the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board had claimed to represent us though we did not authorize him and he had also stated as if we are functioning under the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board. We were not put on notice of the case. We came to know of the order only after we received a copy from the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board. We informed the Wakf Board that, the Wakf Board cannot interfere in our day-to-day administration.
Page No.14
Corrs.
-15-

26. We submit that, the proximate cause for filing the Writ Appeal is the order dated 05.01.2022 in W.P. No. 27770 of 2021.

27. We submit that, the Writ Petitioner in W.P. No. 27770 of 2021 sought a mandamus to permit him and three others to participate in the holy ceremonies as stated in his representation dated 20.12.2021.

28. We submit that, we never received any representation from the Writ Petitioner or his associates. On the contrary the affidavit filed in support of W.P. No. 27770 of 2021 states that, the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators would not permit him and therefore he approached the 2nd respondent namely The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board to consider the request. The order dated 05.01.2022 in W.P. No. 27770 of 2021 was allowed at the admission stage itself. Paragraph 4 of the order contain the submissions made by the Counsel for the 2nd Respondent Wakf Board. Paragraph 8 of the order states that, the Wakf Board represented by their counsel categorically stated that, their representation could be considered by the Wakf Board and that once

Page No.15
Corrs.
-16-

permission is given by the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, they would be in a position to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.

29. We submit that, it is true that, subsequently the Wakf Board rejected the representation of the petitioner on the basis of our letter dated 06.01.2022. We sent a letter dated 06.01.2022 objecting to the stand of the Wakf Board before this Hon’ble Court. We also informed the Wakf Board that, we intended to file a Writ Appeal.

30. We submit that, we were faced with judicial orders namely the order in W.P. No. 25964 of 2021 and in W.P. No. 27770 of 2021. In both the cases, the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board claimed that the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators appointed by the Hon’ble High Court have to work under the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board. The Ad-hoc Board of Administrators encountered difficulties in the day-to-day administration of the Dargah since the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board passed conflicting orders more so during the time of Annual Urs Festival. We only wanted orders from this Hon’ble Court apropos the relationship between

Page No.16
Corrs.
-17-

Ad-hoc Board of Administrators and the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board in the context of the order dated 10.02.2017 in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 batch, the order dated 08.06.2018 in W.A. No. 1640 of 2016 batch, the Status Quo order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the order passed by the Division Bench in LPA No. 1 of 2020 dated 20.12.2019.

31. We submit that, the 1st of us is a retired IAS Officer and the 2nd of us is a retired District Judge. We believe that as for as our honesty and integrity is concerned, we have done our best in accordance with our conscience and we believe that, we have maintained highest degree of integrity in the discharge of our responsibilities.

32. We submit that, all the expenditures incurred are strictly in accordance with the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court. We have filed the entire accounts. We have also filed a performance report.

33. We submit that, on receipt of order dated 23.02.2022 we sent two communications by email and by WhatsApp to the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board and
Page No.17
Corrs.
-18-

the Manager of the Nagore Dargah. The manner in which the Chief Executive Officer assumed charge of the management of the Dargah speaks for itself.

34. We submit that, we have done our best in the interest of the Dargah. We only want our reputation protected. We humbly pray that the adverse remarks contained in the order of this Hon’ble Court made in W.A. N. 327 of 2022 against the Ad-hoc Board of Administrators may please be expunged and thus render justice.

35. We submit that, Rs. 35,000/- has been spent towards expenses and fees for filing W.A. No. 327 of 2022. We may be permitted to remit the sum of Rs.35,000/- to the Account of Nagore Dargah.

36. The above facts are true.

Solemnly affirm at Chennai Before me,
this the 09th day of March 2022
and signed their name in my
presence. ADVOCATE, CHENNAI.

Page No.18 & Last
Corrs.

You may also like...