Patna High Court
Md. YasinversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
A writ petition is not maintainable where Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management Act, 1995 mandates an appeal to the High Court within ninety days, rendering the writ dismissed.
Summary
Petitioner Md. Yasin sought a writ to set aside a 2014 order of the Bihar Waqf Tribunal that declared his residential house a waqf property and appointed a respondent as Mutawalli, directing him to vacate. The Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board contended that the writ was not maintainable because Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995 provides that aggrieved parties must appeal to the High Court within ninety days, not approach the court via a writ. The petitioner offered to withdraw the writ and file an appropriate appeal. The court, without examining the merits, dismissed the writ application on the ground of non‑maintainability under the statutory provision. Consequently, the Tribunal’s order remains in force pending any proper appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition challenging a Waqf Tribunal order is maintainable under Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management Act, 1995
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Waqf
- Property
- High Court
- Writ jurisdiction
- Section 83(9)
- Maintainability
- Appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5926 of 2026
======================================================
Md. Yasin Son of Late Kallu Miyan, Resident of Mohalla-Karansarai (Adda
Road), P.O. and Police Station-Sasaram, District-Rohtas (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Minority Welfare Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Minority Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Collector cum District Magistrate, Rohtas.
4. The Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board through its Chief Executive Officer,
Patna, Bihar.
5. Saiyad Najeeb Ahmad, Son of Late Latif Ahmad, resident of Mohalla-
Karansarai (Add Road), P.O. and Police Station-Sasaram, District-Rohtas
(Bihar).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Abhishek, Advocate
Mr. Varun Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Venkatesh Kaushik, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anuradha Singh, SC- 21
For Resp. no.4 : Md. Helal Ahmad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board (respondent no.4).
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following reliefs:
“I. For setting aside the
order dated 22.10.2014 passed by the
Presiding Officer, Bihar Waqf
Tribunal, Patna in Title Eviction Suit
No.03 of 2009, filed by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5926 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/3
Respondent No.5 against the
petitioner, by which the petitioner has
been directed to vacate the suit
property, which is a residential house
of the petitioner by treating the same
as a Waqf property and the
Respondent No.5 has been declared
Mutawalli and accordingly sit was
decreed.
II. For directing the
Respondent State Authority to take
proper steps to protect the possession
of the petitioner over his residential
house till the disposal of the present
writ application and further operation
and effect of the impugned order dated
22.10.2014 may be stayed or kept in
abeyance till the adjudication of the
present writ application.
III. For grant of any other
relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is
legally entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent no.4 submits that the instant writ application is not
maintainable in view of the provisions contained in section
83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment,
Efficiency and Development Act, 1995.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5926 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/3
4. Section 83(9) of the Act is reproduced herein below
for ready reference:
“83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc.
(9) Any person aggrieved by the
order of the Tribunal, may appeal to
the High Court within a period of
ninety days from the date of receipt of
the order of the Tribunal.”
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
prays for withdrawal of the instant writ application for filing an
appropriate application, in accordance with law.
6. Without entering into the merits of the case of the
petitioner, the writ application stands disposed off.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.