Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Jammu And Kashmir/
  4. 2024/
  5. February

Abdul Rashid Bhat and Ors. vs. Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (hajj and Auqaf)

Decided on 29 February 2024• Citation: WP(C)/2117/2023• High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                      HIGH  COURT   OF JAMMU   & KASHMIR   AND LADAKH               
                                        AT  SRINAGAR                                
                                               Reserved on: 16.02.2024              
                                               Pronounced on: 29.02.2024            
                                                WP(C) No.2361/2022                  
                                                c/w                                 
                                                WP(C) No.2117/2023                  
                                                WP(C) No.2968/2022                  
                   WP(C) No.2361/2022                                               
                   Traders Association Ziyarat Baba Reshi (RA) Tangmarg             
                   Through:-                                                        
                     1. Mohammad  Yousuf Sheikh (Age 60 years)- President           
                        S/o Laal Sheikh, R/o Nambalnaal Tangmarg                    
                        Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla                          
                     2. Manzoor Ahmad Tantray (age 55 years)-General Secretary S/o  
                        Abdul Gani Tantray R/o Chontipatri Tehsil Tangmarg District 
                        Baramulla.                                                  
                     3. Ghulam Mohammad Reshi (age 52)-Vice President               
                        S/o Abdul Gaffar Reshi                                      
                        R/o Chontipatri Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla          
                     4. Abdul Salam Sheikh (Age 58 years)-Secretary                 
                        S/o Laal Mohammad Sheikh                                    
                        R/o Nambalnaal Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla           
                     5. Abdul Ahad Sheikh (Age 56 years-Joint Secretary             
                        S/o Ghulam Ahmad Sheikh                                     
                        R/o Alpatri Babareshi Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla    
                     6. Bashir Ahmad Khan (age 53 years-Member                      
                        S/o Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Khan                                 
                        R/o Chontipaptri Tehsl Tangmarg District Baramulla          
                        All office Bearers of Traders Association Baba Reshi (RA)   
                        Tangmarg and Shopkeepers/Kiosk owners of market Ziyarat     
                        Sharief Baba REshi (RA) Market.                             
                                                             .....Petitioners(s)    
                        V/s                                                         
                   1.  Union Territory of J&K through Commissioner cum              
                       Secretary to Govt. Revenue, Hajj & Auqaf Deptt.,             

                        Civil Secretariat, Srinagar.                                
                   2.   Chairperson J&K Board for Muslim Specified Waqf and Waqf    
                        Properties, Zero Bridge, Srinagar.                          
                   3.   The Chief Executive Officer, J&K Board for Muslim Specified 
                        Waqaf and Waqf Property Zero Bridge, Srinagar               
                   4.   Executive Magistrate (Tehsldar) J&K Waqf Board, Srinagar    
                   5.   Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla                              
                                                           ...Respondent(s)         
                   WP(C) No.2117/2023                                               
                   1.  Abdul Rashid Bhat (age 70 years)                             
                       S/o Abdul Ahad Bhat                                          
                       R/o Mulabangil Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla            
                   2.  Mohammad  Shafi Lone (Age 60 years)                          
                       S/o Wali Mohammad                                            
                       R/o Waniloo Hajibal Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla       
                   3.  Ghulam Mohiddin Khan (Age 55 years)                          
                       S/o Sonaullah Khan                                           
                       R/o Waripora Magam Tehsil Karhama District Baramulla         
                   4.  Mohammad Yasin Ganaie (Age 50 years)                         
                       S/o Ghulam Mohammad                                          
                       R/o Gokhama Kunzer Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla        
                   5.  Ghulam Ahmad Lone (Age 70 years)                             
                       S/o Mohammad Subhan                                          
                       R/o Waniloo Hajibal Tehsil Karhama District Baramulla        
                   6.  Nazir Ahmad Rather (Age 55 years)                            
                       S/o Mohammad Subhan Rather                                   
                       R/o Namalnaar Babareshi Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla   
                   7.  Ghulam Ahmad Bhat (Age 60 years)                             
                       S/o Abdul Ahad                                               
                       R/o Mulabangil Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla            
                   2                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   8.  Bashir Ahmad Bhat (Age 62 years)                             
                       S/o Abdul Ahmad                                              
                       R/o Mulabangil Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla            
                   9.  Naseema Begum (Age 55 years)                                 
                       W/o Ghulam Rasool Bhat                                       
                       R/o Batapora Pattan Tehsil Pattan District Baramulla         
                   10. Mohammad  Yousuf War (Age 65 years)                          
                       S/o Abdul Gani                                               
                       R/o Budipora Tangmarg Tehsil Tangmarg, District Baramulla    
                   11. Khurshid Ahmad War (age 42 years)                            
                       S/o Abdul Ahad                                               
                       R/o Budipora Tangmarg Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla     
                   12. Abdul Hamid Kalas (Age 43 years)                             
                       S/o Ghulam Mohammad                                          
                       R/o Kahwal Bulbulabad Baramulla District Baramulla           
                   13. Wali Mohmmad Bhat (Age 68 years)                             
                       S/o Abdul Gani                                               
                       R/o Mulabangil Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla            
                   14. Abdul Majeed Lone (Age 50 years                              
                       S/o Abdul Aziz                                               
                       R/o Waniloo Tangmarg Tehsil Tangmarg District Baramulla      
                   15. Mohammad  Shafi Wani (Age 55 years)                          
                       S/o Ghulam Ahmad                                             
                       R/o Wayil Pattan Tehsil Pattan District Baramulla.           
                                                             …….Petitioner(s)       
                        V/s                                                         
                   1.   Union Territory of J&K through Commissioner cum             
                        Secretary to Govt. Revenue, Hajj & Auqaf Deptt.,            
                        Civil Secretariat, Srinagar.                                
                   2.   Chairperson J&K Board for Muslim Specified Waqf and Waqf    
                        Properties, Zero Bridge, Srinagar.                          
                   3                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   3.   The Chief Executive Officer, J&K Board for Muslim Specified 
                        Waqaf and Waqf Property Zero Bridge, Srinagar               
                   4.   Executive Magistrate (Tehsldar) J&K Waqf Board, Srinagar    
                   5.   Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla                              
                                                           ...Respondent(s)         
                   WP(C) No.2968/2022                                               
                   1.   Firdous Ahmed Sheikh, aged 65 years                         
                        S/o Haji Ghulam Rasool Sheikh                               
                        R/o Naid Doori, Shri Bhat Alamgari Bazar Srinagar,          
                        Shop No.10                                                  
                  2.    Shameem Hussain Bhat, aged 61 years                         
                        S/o Ghulam nabi Bhat                                        
                        R/o Drugjan, Dalgate Srinagar, Shop No.91                   
                   3.   M/s Habib Sheikh and Sons                                   
                        Through Abdul Salam Sheikh, aged 88 years                   
                        S/o Habibullah Sheikh R/o Hawal Srinagar                    
                        Shop No.73 and 78                                           
                   4.   Majeed & Co                                                 
                        Through its proprietor                                      
                        Abdul Majeed Magloo, aged 75 years                          
                        S/o Mohammad Sidiq Magloo                                   
                        R/o Mujahid Manzil Dalal Mohalla, Srinagar                  
                        R/P Nowgam Srinagar, Shop No.74                             
                   5.   Sheikh Najeeb Ahmed, aged 65 years                          
                        S/o Haji Mohammad Shafi Sheikh                              
                        R/o Bishember Nagar, Khayam, Srinagar                       
                        Tenant of Hall                                              
                   6.   Nabil Riyaz, aged 35 years                                  
                        S/o Riyaz Ahmed Shah                                        
                        R/o Gulab Bagh, Srinagar                                    
                        Room No.10-B                                                
                   7.   Haji Mohammad Shafi Sheikh                                  
                        S/o Mohammad Ismaiel Sheikh                                 
                        R/o Bishember Nagar, Munawar Abad, Srinagar                 
                        Through his son Najeeb Ahmed Sheikh, age 65 years           
                   4                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                        S/o Mohammad Shafi Shafi Sheikh                             
                        Room No.5 and 6                                             
                   8.   Mohammad Amin Shah                                          
                        S/o Gul Shah                                                
                        R/o Gulab Bagh, Srinagar                                    
                        Through his son Riyaz Ahmed Shah, aged 65 years             
                        R/o Gulab Bagh, Srinagar                                    
                        Shop No.88, 89 and 90                                       
                                                           ……..Petitioners          
                                  Through:                                          
                                       Mr. N.A.Tabasum, Advocate with               
                                       Mr. Idrees Ahmad & Mr. Nayeem-ul-Haq,        
                                       Advocates in WP(C) Nos.2361/2022 & 2117/2023 
                                       Ms. Rehana Fayaz, Advocate with Mr. Agha     
                                       Faisal Ali, Advocate in WP(C) No.2968/2022   
                   V/s                                                              
                   1.   Union Territory of J&K through Commissioner/                
                        Secretary to Govt. Revenue, Hajj & Auqaf, J&K               
                        Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu.                          
                   2.   Chief Executive Officer, J&K Waqaf Board, Zero Bridge,      
                        Srinagar                                                    
                   3.   Executive Magistrate (Tehsldar) J&K Waqf Board,             
                        Zero Bridge, Srinagar                                       
                                                             ondents                
                                                      …….Resp                       
                                  Through:                                          
                                       Mr. M.I.Dar, Advcoate with                   
                                       Mr. Ruaani Ahmad Baba & Ms. Sana Imam,       
                                       Advocates                                    
                   Coram:                                                           
                          HON’BLE   MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV   KUMAR,  JUDGE             
                                            JUDGMENT                                
                   1.   Since the issue raised in all these petitions was similar, as such,
                   these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this
                   common judgment.                                                 
                   5                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   2.   The petitioners in all these petitions are in occupation of Waqf
                   properties as licensees thereof and have essentially raised a dispute with
                   regard to an arbitrary, irrational and exorbitant enhancement of monthly
                   rent. The star argument of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
                   is that the Waqf Board being an instrumentality of the State is expected
                   to act fairly and in public interest. The Waqf Board increased the rentals
                   of the properties under occupation of the petitioners in ex-parte and
                   without providing them an opportunity of being heard.            
                   3.        Mr. M.I.Dar, appearing on behalf of the Waqf Board takes
                   strong exception to the maintainability of the petitions on the ground
                   that State Waqf Board constituted under The Waqf Act, 1995 is neither a
                   State nor any person or authority amenable to the writ jurisdiction vested
                   in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.    
                   4.        Having heard learned counsel for the parties and regard
                   being had to the preliminary objection raised by Mr. M.I.Dar to the
                   maintainability of these petition, following preliminary issue was framed
                   and taken up for consideration in the first instance:-           
                             Whether the State Board of Auqaf constituted under     
                             Section 13 of the Waqf                                 
                                                Act, 1995 [“the Act”] is amenable   
                             to the writ jurisdiction of this Court vested by Article 226
                             of the Constitution of India?                          
                   6                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   5.        The issue raised before me shall not pose much difficulty as
                   a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shafat Ahmad Khan and
                   others v. State and others, JKJ 2016 (1) 433 has already considered
                   the issue of maintainability of writ petition under Article 226 of the
                   Constitution of India against the Waqf Board constituted under J&K
                   Muslim Specified Waqfs and Specified Waqf Properties (Management 
                   Regulation) Act, 2004. The Division Bench after placing reliance on
                   Ajay Hasia v. Khauid Mujib Sehravardi, 1981 (1) SCC 722; Andi    
                   Mukta Sadguri Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti        
                   Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V R Rudani, 1989 (2) SCC 69; Pareep     
                   Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, 2002 (5) SCC
                   111; Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India 2005(4) SCC 649 and K.K.
                   Saksena v. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage,  
                   2015 (4) SCC 670 come to the conclusion that the State Government did
                   not have any deep and pervasive administrative control over the Waqf
                   Board and was exercising merely regulatory control over the Board. It
                   was, thus, opined that the Waqf Board was not falling in the definition
                   of „other authority‟ used in Article 226 of the Constitution. It further
                   held that while dealing with the eviction of unauthorized occupants and
                   demolition of unauthorized constructions on the Waqf property, the
                   Board was not in strict sense discharging any public functions or public
                   duty. It was, thus, concluded by the Division Bench that even if Waqf
                   Board were to be held as “other authority” within the meaning of Article
                   226 of the Constitution of India, yet its decision regulating management
                   7                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   of the Waqf properties viz-a-viz a private individual would not involve
                   public law element. The judgment in K.K.Saksena (supra) was strongly
                   relied upon by the Division Bench. Shorn of unnecessary details and
                   without tracing out the development of law on the point, suffice would it
                   be to set out the conclusions drawn by the Division Bench of this Court
                   in Shafat Ahmad Khan‟s case. For facility of reference, relevant extract
                   from the judgment in                case (supra) is reproduced   
                                    Shafat Ahmad Khan’s                             
                   hereunder:-                                                      
                           “18. The legal position that emerges against above backdrop, may be
                           summarized as under:-                                    
                           i.                                                       
                             That definition of „State‟ contained in Artl. 12 is for the purpose of
                              application of provisions contained in part III of the Constitution.
                           ii. Writ jurisdiction of High Court under Art. 226 is not limited to the
                              Government or Authority which qualifies to be „State‟ under Art.
                              12. Power extends to issue directions, orders or writs to “any person
                              or Authority”.                                        
                           iii.                  used in Art. 226 is to receive wider
                             The expression „Authority‟                             
                              meaning than the meaning given to the same expression used in Art.
                              12 of the Constitution.                               
                           iv.                                                      
                             The term „Authority‟ iin Art. 12 means a body, performing public
                              functions or public duty. The emphasis always being on the nature
                              of duty imposed on such body, namely “public duty” to make it
                              exigible to Art. 226 of the Constitution.             
                           v. That merely because the Government has power to depute an
                              Officer(s), to be part of administrative set up, of an institution or
                              body is not to be                                     
                                           construed as „pervasive administrative‟ control
                              over the body. Regulatory power is always to be distinguished from
                              administrative control.                               
                           vi. Power to issue directions, orders or writs under Art. 226 is not
                              limited to enforcement of fundamental rights, conferred by Part-III
                              of the Constitution but also „for any other purpose‟. 
                           vii. Even if a body performing public duty is amenable to writ
                              jurisdiction, all its decisions are not subject to judicial review. Only
                   8                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                              those decisions which have public element therein can be judicial
                              reviewed under writ jurisdiction.”                    
                   6.        It is in the light of legal position succinctly summed up by
                   the Division Bench, we need to examine various provisions of the Waqf
                   Act, 1995. The Waqf Board constituted under Section 13 of the Act is
                   undoubtedly a statutory authority. An authority constituted under a
                   statute would not ipso facto come within the ambit of term “State”
                   referable to Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It would not come
                                                              less the authority    
                   within the scope of term “State” under Article 12 un             
                   concerned satisfies three tests laid down by the Supreme Court in the
                   case of Pardeep Kumar Biswas (supra) i.e. the authority is financially,
                   functionally and administratively controlled by the Government.  
                   7.        It is trite that the definition of State contained under Article
                   12 is for the purpose of its application to provisions contained in Part-III
                   of the Constitution. Obviously, prerogative writs under Article 32 of the
                   Constitution of India contained in Part-III of the Constitution shall be
                   issued by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental
                   rights against the authorities comprehended in the               
                                                              term “State” as       
                   contained in Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The jurisdiction of
                   High Court under Article 226 is an extraordinary jurisdiction and is not
                   limited to the Government, its instrumentalities or an authority which
                   qualifies to be a „State‟ under Article 12 of the Constitution. The power
                   of the High Court to issue writ, order or direction extends to „any person
                   9                                                                
                                                  WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   or a                                                             
                      uthority‟ and the issuance of writ, order or direction under Article
                   226 is not only limited to the enforcement of fundamental rights but
                   would lie even for any other purpose.                            
                                                   The term „any other purpose‟     
                   contained in Article 226 of the Constitution of India is of course
                   required to be construed ejusdem generis, meaning thereby, any other
                                                                   “                
                   purpose would not be a private dispute between the parties but for
                         ”                                                          
                   enforcement or performance of a duty having public law element.  
                   8.        To better appreciate the controversy raised in these   
                   petitions, it would be appropriate to set out certain provisions contained
                   in the Act, which for facility of reference are reproduced hereunder:-
                        Section 13 of the Act                                       
                             13. Incorporation.                                     
                             “                                                      
                             (1) With effect from such date as the State Government may, by
                             notification in the Official Gazette, appoint in this behalf, there shall
                                                1                                   
                             be established a Board of [Auqaf] under such name as may be
                             specified in the notification:                         
                             Provided that in case where a Board of Waqf has not been
                             established, as required under this sub-section, a Board of Waqf shall,
                             without prejudice to the provisions of this Act or any other law for the
                             time being in force, be established within six months from the date of
                             commencement of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013         
                             (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), if the
                             Shia auqaf in any State constitute in number more than fifteen per
                             cent. of all the auqaf in the State or if the income of the properties of
                             the Shia auqaf in the State constitutes more than fifteen per cent of the
                             total income of properties of all the auqaf in the State, the State
                             Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, establish a
                             Board of Auqaf each for Sunni auqaf and for Shia auqaf under such
                             names as may be specified in the notification.         
                   10                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             (2A) Where a Board of Waqf is established under sub-section (2) of
                             section 13, in the case of Shia waqf, the Members shall belong to the
                             Shia Muslim and in the case of Sunni waqf, the Members shall belong
                             to the Sunni Muslim.                                   
                             (3) The Board shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession
                             and a common seal with power to acquire and hold property and to
                             transfer any such property subject to such conditions and restrictions
                             as may be prescribed and shall by the said name sue and be sued.
                             Relevant extract of Section 14 of the Act is reproduced as
                   under:-                                                          
                                                                        2           
                                Composition of Board.---(1) The Board for a State and [the
                             “14.                                                   
                             National Capital Territory of Delhi] shall consist of--
                             (a) a Chairperson;                                     
                             (b) one and not more than two members, as the State Government
                             may think fit, to be elected from each of the electoral colleges
                             consisting of--                                        
                             (i) Muslim Members of Parliament from the State or, as the case may
                             be, the National Capital Territory of Delhi;           
                             (ii) Muslim Members of the State Legislature;          
                             (iii) Muslim members of the Bar Council of the concerned State or
                             Union territory:                                       
                             Provided that in case there is no Muslim member of the Bar Council
                             of a State or a Union territory, the State Government or the Union
                             territory administration, as the case may be, may nominate any senior
                             Muslim advocate from that State or the Union territory, and]
                             (iv) mutawallis of the auqaf having an annual income of rupees one
                             lakh and above.                                        
                             4                                                      
                             [Explanation I.--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that
                             the members from categories mentioned in sub-clauses (i) to (iv),
                             shall be elected from the electoral college constituted for each
                             category.                                              
                             Explanation II.--For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that
                             in case a Muslim member ceases to be a Member of Parliament from
                             the State or National Capital Territory of Delhi as referred to in sub-
                             clause (i) of clause (b) or ceases to be a Member of the State
                             Legislative Assembly as required under sub-clause (ii) of clause (b),
                             such member shall be deemed to have vacated the office of the
                             member of the Board for the State or National Capital Territory of
                             Delhi, as the case may be, from the date from which such member
                             ceased to be a Member of Parliament from the State National Capital
                             Territory of Delhi, or a Member of the State Legislative Assembly, as
                             the case may be;                                       
                   11                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             5                                                      
                             [(c) one person from amongst Muslims, who has professional
                             experience in town planning or business management, social work,
                             finance or revenue, agriculture and development activities, to be
                             nominated by the State Government;                     
                             (d) one person each from amongst Muslims, to be nominated by the
                             State Government from recognised scholars in Shia and Sunni Islamic
                             Theology;                                              
                             (e) one person from amongst Muslims, to be nominated by the State
                             Government from amongst the officers of the State Government not
                             below the rank of Joint Secretary to the State Government;
                             (1A) No Minister of the Central Government or, as the case may be, a
                             State Government, shall be elected or nominated as a member of the
                             Board:                                                 
                             Provided that in case of a Union territory, the Board shall consist of
                             not less than five and not more than seven members to be appointed
                             by the Central Government from categories specified under sub-
                             clauses (i) to (iv) of clause (b) or clauses (c) to (e) in sub-section (1):
                             Provided further that at least two Members appointed on the Board
                             shall be women:                                        
                             Provided also that in every case where the system of mutawalli exists,
                             there shall be one mutawalli as the member of the Board.
                                                                  ”                 
                             Relevant extract of Section 32 of the Act reads thus:- 
                                                         ----(1) Subject to any rules
                             “32. Powers and functions of the Board.                
                             that may be made under this Act, the general superintendence of
                             all auqaf in a State shall vest in the Board established or the State; and
                             it shall be the duty of the Board so to exercise its powers under this
                             Act as to ensure that the auqaf under its superintendence are properly
                             maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is
                             duly applied to the objects and for the purposes for which such auqaf
                             were created or intended:                              
                             Provided that in exercising its powers under this Act in respect of
                             any waqf the Board shall act in conformity with the directions of
                             the waqf, the purposes of the waqf and any usage or custom of
                             the waqf sanctioned by the school of Muslim law to which the waqf
                             belongs.                                               
                             .......................”                               
                             Section 56 of the Act is reproduced hereunder:-        
                             56. Restriction on power to grant lease of waqf property.--(1) A
                             “                                                      
                             lease for any period exceeding thirty years] of any immovable
                             property which is waqf property, shall, notwithstanding anything
                             contained in the deed or instrument of waqf or in any other law for the
                             time being in force, be void and of no effect:         
                             Provided that a lease for any period up to thirty years may be made
                             for Commercial activities, education or health purposes, with the
                   12                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             approval of the State Government, for such period and purposes as
                             may be specified in the rules made by the Central Government:
                             Provided further that lease of any immovable waqf property, which is
                             an agricultural land, for a period exceeding three years shall,
                             notwithstanding anything contained in the deed or instrument of waqf
                             or in any other law for the time being in force, be void and of no
                             effect:                                                
                             Provided also that before making lease of any waqf property, the
                             Board shall publish the details of lease and invite bids in at least one
                             leading national and regional news papers.             
                             A lease for a period of one year but not exceeding thirty years of
                             immovable property which is waqf property shall, notwithstanding
                             anything contained in the deed or instrument of waqf or in any other
                             law for the time being in force, be void and of no effect unless it is
                             made with the previous sanction of the Board.          
                             (3) The Board shall, in granting sanction for lease or renewal thereof
                             under this section review the terms and conditions on which the
                             lease is proposed to be granted or renewed and make its approval
                             subject to the revision of such terms and conditions in such manner as
                             it may direct:                                         
                             Provided that the Board shall immediately intimate the State
                             Government regarding a lease for any period exceeding three years of
                             any waqf property and thereafter it may become effective after the
                             expiry of forty-five days from the date on which the Board intimates
                             the State Government.                                  
                             (4) Every rule made by the Central Government under this section
                             shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of
                             Parliament, while it is in session for a total period of thirty days,
                             which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive
                             sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately
                             following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both
                             Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses
                             agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have
                             effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may
                             be; so, however, that any such modification or annulment shall be
                             without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under
                             that rule.                                             
                                   ”                                                
                             Section 77 of the Act reads thus:-                     
                                Waqf Fund.--(1) All moneys received or realised by the Board
                             “77.                                                   
                             under this Act and all other moneys received as donations,
                             benefactions or grants by the Board shall form a fund to be called
                             the Waqf Fund.                                         
                             (2) All moneys received by the Board, as donations, benefactions and
                             grants shall be deposited and accounted for under a separate sub-
                             head.                                                  
                             (3) Subject to any rules that may be made by the State Government in
                             this behalf, the Waqf Fund shall be under the control of the Board, so,
                             however, that the Waqf Fund under the control of common Waqf
                   13                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             Board shall be subject to rules, if any, made in this behalf by the
                             Central Government.                                    
                             (4) The Waqf Fund shall be applied to--                
                             (a) repayment of any loan incurred under section 75 and payment of
                             interest thereon;                                      
                             (b) payment of the cost of audit of the Waqf Fund and the accounts
                             of auqaf;                                              
                             (c) payment of the salary and allowances to the officers and staff of
                             the Board;                                             
                             (d) payment of traveling allowances to the Chairperson, members, of
                             the Board;                                             
                             (e) payment of all expenses incurred by the Board in the performance
                             of the duties imposed, and the exercise of the powers conferred, by or
                             under this Act;                                        
                             (f) payment of all expenses incurred by the Board for the discharge of
                             any obligation imposed on it by or under any law for the time being in
                             force.                                                 
                             3                                                      
                              [(g) payment of maintenance to Muslim women as ordered by a
                             court of competent jurisdiction under the provisions of the Muslim
                             Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (25 of 1986).
                             (5) If any balance remains after meeting the expenditure referred to in
                             sub-section (4), the Board may use any portion of such balance for the
                             preservation and protection of waqf properties or for such other
                             purposes as it may deem fit.”                          
                   9.        Scanning through different provisions of the Act,      
                   particularly, the provisions contained in Chapter IV makes it abundantly
                   clear that no doubt the Board of Auqaf constituted by the State  
                   Government under Section 13 of the Act is a statutory body but the same
                   is not under direct, deep, and pervasive control of the Government. It
                   may be clarified that so far as Union Territory is concerned, the Board
                   of Auqaf is constituted by the Central Government from the categories
                   specified under Subsection (1)(b)(i) to (iv) of Section 14 of the Act or
                   Subjections (1)(c) to (e) of Section 14 of the Act.              
                   10.       In terms of Section 32 of the Act, general superintendent of
                   Auqaf in a State vests with the Board and it is the duty of the Board to
                   14                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   exercise its power under the Act to ensure that Auqaf under its  
                   superintendence are properly managed, controlled or administered and
                   the income generated therefrom is duly applied to achieve the objects
                   and the purposes for which the Auqaf had been created.           
                   11.       Under Section 77 of the Act, a Waqf Fund is created which
                   consists of all moneys received or realized by the Board under the Act as
                   also of other moneys received as donations, benefactions or grants by
                   the Board. As is provided under Subsection (3) of Section 77 of the Act,
                   subject to any rules that may be made by the State Government in this
                   behalf, the Waqf fund is placed under the control of the Board. Under
                   Section 56 of the Act, grant of lease of Waqf property is regulated.
                   Power to lease out the Waqf property, subject to the restraint contained
                   in Section 56 of the Act read with Waqf Properties Lease Rules, 2014,
                   vests with the Board of Auqaf.                                   
                   12.       Viewed from any angle, the Act does not vest in the Central
                   Government or State Government a deep and pervasive financial,   
                   functional and administrative control and that being the position, the
                   Board of Auqaf, despite being a statutory body constituted under the
                   Act, may not qualify to be State as contained under Article 12 of the
                                         „   ‟                                      
                   Constitution of India. Aside, the function of the Board of Auqaf entering
                   into lease agreements with private individuals in respect of Waqf
                   properties is more of a commercial/contractual nature rather than a
                   public function. The arrangement between the Board of Auqaf and the
                   15                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   lessees aimed at utilization of Waqf properties for generating funds to be
                   applied to achieve the objects and purposes of the creation of Waqf is
                   more or less commercial in nature and, therefore, lacks public law
                   element. Although, as discussed above, the Board of Auqaf does not fall
                                                             Article 12 of the      
                   within the definition of term „State‟ contained in               
                   Constitution of India, yet a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                   India would lie if it is found that the Board is performing public
                   functions and the impugned action taken by it involves a public law
                   element in it.                                                   
                   13.       Obviously, as it has emerged from the discussion made  
                   above, neither the Board of Auqaf, constituted by the Central    
                   Government or Government of Jammu & Kashmir while issuing orders,
                   directions or notices regulating the lease of properties vested in it to
                   private individual(s) for generating funds, performs any public  
                   function/duty nor such order, direction or notice involves any public law
                   element.                                                         
                   14.       For the aforesaid reason, no writ under Article 226 of the
                   Constitution of India would lie against the Board of Auqaf at the
                   instance of lessees or persons in occupation of the Waqf properties, that
                   too, for the enforcement of private rights arising out of the lease
                   agreement(s) entered into or to be entered into by the parties.  
                   16                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   15.       Before I close, I deem it in place to refer to a recent
                   judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of                     
                                                         St. Mary’s Education       
                   Society and another vs. Rejendra Prasad Bargava and others, 2022 
                   SCC Online SC 1091. The Supreme Court after surveying the law on 
                   the subject summed up its conclusion in para 69 which is set out below:
                             “69. We may sum up our final conclusions as under:     
                             (a)  An application under Article 226 of the Constitution is
                                  maintainable against a person or a body discharging public
                                  duties or public functions. The public duty cast may be either
                                  statutory or otherwise and where it is otherwise, the body or
                                  the person must be shown to owe that duty or obligation to the
                                  public involving the public law element. Similarly, for
                                  ascertaining the discharge of public function, it must be
                                  established that the body or the person was seeking to achieve
                                  the same for the collective benefit of the public or a section of
                                  it and the authority to do so must be accepted by the public.
                             (b)  Even if it be assumed that an educational institution is
                                  imparting public duty, the act complained of must have a
                                  direct nexus with the discharge of public duty. It is
                                  indisputably a public law action which confers a right upon
                                  the aggrieved to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction
                                  under Article 226 for a prerogative writ. Individual wrongs or
                                  breach of mutual contracts without having any public element
                                  as its integral part cannot be rectified through a writ petition
                                  under Article 226. Wherever Courts have intervened in their
                                  exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226, either the service
                                  conditions were regulated by the statutory provisions or the
                                  employer had the status of “State” within the expansive
                                  definition under Article 12 or it was found that the action
                                  complained of has public law element.             
                   17                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             (c)  It must be consequently held that while a body may be
                                  discharging a public function or performing a public duty and
                                  thus its actions becoming amenable to judicial review by a
                                  Constitutional Court, its employees would not have the right
                                  to invoke the powers of the High Court conferred by Article
                                  226 in respect of matter relating to service where they are not
                                  governed or controlled by the statutory provisions. An
                                  educational institution may perform myriad functions
                                  touching various facets of public life and in the societal
                                  sphere. While such of those functions as would fall within the
                                  domain of a "public function" or "public duty" be 
                                  undisputedly open to challenge and scrutiny under Article 226
                                  of the Constitution, the actions or decisions taken solely
                                  within the confines of an ordinary contract of service, having
                                  no statutory force or backing, cannot be recognised as being
                                  amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution.
                                  In the absence of the service conditions being controlled or
                                  governed by statutory provisions, the matter would remain in
                                  the realm of an ordinary contract of service.     
                             (d)  Even if it be perceived that imparting education by private
                                  unaided the school is a public duty within the expanded
                                  expression of the term, an employee of a nonteaching staff
                                  engaged by the school for the purpose of its administration or
                                  internal management is only an agency created by it. It is
                                  immaterial whether “A” or “B” is employed by school to
                                  discharge that duty. In any case, the terms of employment of
                                  contract between a school and nonteaching staff cannot and
                                  should not be construed to be an inseparable part of the
                                  obligation to impart education. This is particularly in respect
                                  to the disciplinary proceedings that may be initiated against a
                                  particular employee. It is only where the removal of an
                                  employee of nonteaching staff is regulated by some statutory
                                  provisions, its violation by the employer in contravention of
                                  law may be interfered by the court. But such interference will
                                  be on the ground of breach of law and not on the basis of
                                  interference in discharge of public duty.         
                   18                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                             (e)  From the pleadings in the original writ petition, it is apparent
                                  that no element of any public law is agitated or otherwise
                                  made out. In other words, the action challenged has no public
                                  element and writ of mandamus cannot be issued as the action
                                  was essentially of a private character.           
                   16.       In view of the discussion made above, I have come to a 
                   definite conclusion that the Board of Auqaf constituted under Section 13
                   and 14 of the Act is not amenable to the jurisdiction vested in this Court
                   under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, more so when action
                   impugned neither emanates from the discharge of public function by the
                   Board of Auqaf nor does it involve a public law element.         
                   17.       Having held that the writ petitions are not maintainable, I
                   deem it appropriate to deal with the argument of learned counsel for the
                   parties that in the absence of Constitution of Tribunal in the Union
                   Territory of Jammu & Kashmir under Section 83 of the Act and non-
                   availability of remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
                   petitioners would be rendered remediless. It is argued that in terms of
                   Section 85 of the Act, jurisdiction of civil Courts, revenue Courts and
                   any other authority is completely barred.                        
                   18.       Before I embark upon the discussion on the issue, I deem it
                   appropriate to set out relevant extract of Section 83 and Section 85 in its
                   entirety. Relevant extract of Section 83 of the Act reads thus:- 
                                         bunals, etc. (1) The State Government shall, by
                        “83. Constitution of Tri —                                  
                        notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may
                   19                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                        think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter
                        relating to a waqf or waqf property, eviction of a tenant or determination of
                        rights and obligations of the lessor and the lessee of such property, under this
                        Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction of such Tribunals.
                        ………………………………………”                                            
                        Section 85 of the Act is reproduced hereunder:-             
                         85. Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts. No suit or other legal proceeding
                        “                          —                                
                        shall lie in any civil court, revenue court and any other authority in respect of
                        any dispute, question or other matter relating to any waqf, waqf property or
                        other matter which is required by or under this Act to be determined by a
                        Tribunal.                                                   
                              ”                                                     
                   19.       From a careful reading of Subsection (1) of Section 83 of
                   the Act, it clearly comes out that each State Government which would
                   include Union Territory as well is put under an obligation to constitute
                   one or more Tribunals, as it may think fit, by issuing notification in the
                   Official Gazette. The word “shall” used in respect of constitution of
                   Tribunal or Tribunals is mandatory in nature. It further comes out that
                   the Tribunal/Tribunals so constituted by the Government of State or
                   Union Territory shall have jurisdiction to determine any dispute,
                   question or other matter relating to a waqf or waqf property, eviction of
                   a tenant or determination of rights and obligations of the lessor and the
                   lessee of such property under this Act. Obviously, the dispute raised in
                   these petitions falls within the determination of Tribunal. As is apparent
                   from a reading of Section 85 of the Act, no Civil Court, Revenue Court
                   and any other authority shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or
                   other legal proceeding in respect of any dispute, question or other matter
                   20                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   relating to any waqf property as also the matter which is required by or
                   under the Act to be determined by the Tribunal.                  
                   20.       In view of the clear legal position emerging from a reading
                   of Sections 83 and 85 of the Act, this Court has no option but to agree
                   with the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that in the event
                   these writ petitions are not entertained, the petitioners would be rendered
                   remediless.                                                      
                   21.       Much was said about the power and jurisdiction of this 
                   Court to entertain the writ petition despite availability of an alternative
                   remedy provided under the Statute. Suffice it to say the question of
                   relegating the parties to an alternative remedy or entertaining of a
                   petition under Article 226 despite availability of statutory alternative
                   remedy would arise only when this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the
                   writ petition. Had this Court come to a conclusion that writ petition
                   challenging the impugned action of the Board of Auqaf was amenable to
                   writ jurisdiction, certainly it would not have relegated the petitioners to
                   the remedy before the Tribunal for the simple reason that the Tribunal
                   does not exist.                                                  
                   22.       In view of the foregoing and being aware that dismissal of
                   these writ petitions on the ground of maintainability under Article 226 of
                   the Constitution of India would in the present circumstances render the
                   petitioners remediless, this Court cannot entertain these petitions and
                   21                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022

                   exercise jurisdiction not vested in it. However, having regard to the
                   predicament faced by the petitioners or may be faced by similarly
                   situated persons in future, I deem it appropriate to remind the  
                   Government of the Union Territory of its statutory duty enjoined on it
                   under Section 83 of the Act and to take requisite steps for constitution of
                   one or more Tribunals, as it may think fit, so that persons aggrieved are
                   not rendered remediless.                                         
                   23.       In the premises, writ petitions are held not maintainable and
                   the same are, accordingly, dismissed. However, while dismissing the
                   writ petitions and taking note of the chaotic situation created due to non
                   constitution of the Tribunal or Tribunals, a direction is issued to the
                   Government of Union Territory to constitute one or more Tribunals, as it
                   may think fit, in terms of Section 83 of the Act within a period of two
                   months from the date of this judgment. Till the Government constitutes
                   Tribunal/Tribunals in terms of Section 83 of the Act, there shall be
                   status quo with regard to the subject matter of these writ petitions.
                                                      (Sanjeev Kumar)               
                                                          Judge                     
                   SRINAGAR                                                         
                   29.02.2024                                                       
                   Vinod,PS                                                         
                                       Whether the order is speaking : Yes          
                                       Whether the order is reportable: Yes         
                   22                                                               
                                                   WP(C)Nos.2361/2022, 2117/2023 & 2968/2022