PEERSHAHA SHIRBLI CHIESTI TRUST THROUGH ITS TRUSTEESversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:19172
                                                1 of 4                      51-WP.1839.2019




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                51 WRIT PETITION NO. 1839 OF 2019

                 PEERSHAHA SHIRBLI CHIESTI TRUST THROUGH ITS TRUSTEES
                       1. SHAIKH BABU MAKKHAN MUJAWAR AND OTHERS
                                             VERSUS
                           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                                 ...
               Mr. Amol K. Gawali, Advocate for the Petitioners.
               Mr. D. R. Korde, AGP for Respondent-State.
               Mr. N. E. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
                                                 ...

                                        CORAM :          SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                        DATE     :       23rd APRIL, 2026
               P.C.:-

               1.         Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

               2.         By the present petition, the Petitioners challenge the order

               dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Competent Authority, National

               Highways     Authority and Sub-Divisional Officer, Sangamner in

               Desk/4/LAQ/117/2019, whereby it was directed that an amount of

               Rs.67,51,831/- be paid to the Tahsildar, Sangamner towards Nazrana

               and further that an amount of Rs.5,86,09,151/- be transferred to the

               Maharashtra State Waqf Board by the Petitioner-Trust.

               3.         Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that the

               Petitioner-Trust is registered under the Waqf Act, 1995, since the year

               2008 and is in possession of land admeasuring 2 Hectares 59 Ares out

               of Survey No.69. The said land was acquired for the purposes of the
                                2 of 4                51-WP.1839.2019




National Highway and compensation was initially awarded and paid to

the Petitioners. Thereafter, upon a reference, the Arbitrator enhanced

the compensation.

4.         It is submitted that Respondent No.3, instead of disbursing

the enhanced compensation to the Petitioners, sought guidance from

the Waqf Board. The Waqf Board, by communication dated 26.04.2018,

advised that the compensation amount be transferred to it. Acting upon

the said communication, Respondent No.3 passed the impugned order

directing transfer of the amounts to the Waqf Board and towards

Nazrana.

5.         Learned Advocate for the Petitioners contends that such

action is wholly without jurisdiction. It is submitted that the Waqf

Board exercises only supervisory control over Waqf properties and is

not entitled to receive compensation payable to the Trust. It is further

contended that there was no legal basis for directing payment of

Nazrana to the Tahsildar, Sangamner. The impugned order, therefore, is

unsustainable in law.

6.         Per contra, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 supports

the impugned order and submits that since the property is a Waqf

property, the Waqf Board is entitled to exercise control, and the

transfer of compensation to the Board was justified to prevent possible

misuse.
                                 3 of 4                51-WP.1839.2019




7.        Learned AGP for the State submits that since the land is

Waqf/Inam land, the direction to deposit Nazrana with the Tahsildar is

proper and supports the impugned order to that extent.

8.        Having considered the submissions and perused the record, it

is not in dispute that the land in question was in possession of the

Petitioner-Trust and that compensation, at the initial stage, was paid to

the Petitioners. It is only after enhancement of compensation that

Respondent No.3 sought guidance from the Waqf Board and, based on

such guidance, passed the impugned order.

9.        Upon consideration of the relevant provisions, including

Section 3H(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956 and the provisions

of the Waqf Act, it is evident that the Waqf Board exercises supervisory

jurisdiction over Waqf properties but is not the competent authority to

receive compensation payable to the Trust in respect of acquired land.

The compensation is required to be paid to the person interested, i.e.,

the entity in possession and entitled thereto.

10.       In the absence of any statutory provision empowering the

Competent Authority to transfer such compensation to the Waqf Board,

the impugned direction cannot be sustained. Similarly, no justification

is made out for directing payment of Nazrana to the Tahsildar in the

facts of the present case.

11.       In view of the above, the impugned order dated 28.01.2019
                                         4 of 4                 51-WP.1839.2019




          passed by the Competent Authority and Sub-Divisional Officer,

          Sangamner, cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed and set

          aside.

          12.      Hence, the writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses

          (a) and (b). The order dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Competent

          Authority, National Highways Authority and Sub-Divisional Officer,

          Sangamner in Desk/4/LAQ/117/2019 is hereby quashed and set aside.



                                           (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)


Tauseef