Authority: High Court of Judicature at Madras

Order Date: 12 November 2026

Case Overview

  • Petition No. 40253 of 2026 (WP) and WMP No. 45188 of 2026 filed by H.M. Shamsuddin, President of the Managing Committee of Edgah Charities and Mosque (G.S.No. 183/Chennai), seeking a writ of mandamus to prevent the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, its Chief Executive Officer, and the Superintendent of Wakf (Chennai & Poonamallee zones) from initiating any proceedings to appoint or remove Mutawallis, assume direct management, or amend/modify the scheme originally framed by this Court in C.S.No. 159 of 1931 dated 13‑Nov‑1933, alleging violation of Section 66 of the Wakf Act, 1995.
  • The Wakf is a registered and notified waqf; its scheme provides a seven‑member Committee with life‑tenure, removable only by the Court or upon resignation, permanent departure, or co‑option of vacancies.
  • On 10‑Jan‑2023 the Chief Executive Officer issued a show‑cause notice alleging irregularities and proposing action under Section 64 of the Wakf Act. The notice was challenged in W.P. No. 2657 of 2023 on jurisdiction grounds; the writ was disposed on 2‑Feb‑2023, leaving the matter open for explanation.
  • An explanation was filed on 15‑Feb‑2024. Subsequently, a Gazette Notification dated 23‑Feb‑2024 (No.VI‑3(a)/16/2024) announced that the Wakf would be taken over under direct management of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board effective 15‑Feb‑2024, appointing the Executive Officer, Chennai and Poonamallee Zones as the Executive Officer. The notification did not specify a duration, but the petitioner contends it is intended for one year, i.e., up to 22‑Feb‑2025.
  • The petitioner filed O.A. No. 42 of 2024 before the Wakf Tribunal seeking a declaration that the Board’s Resolution and Gazette Notification are null and void. This application remains pending.
  • Counsel for the petitioner (Senior Counsel Nissar Ahamed) argued that the Board lacks authority to alter the Court‑framed scheme; only the State Government, in consultation with the Board, may do so under Section 66. The petitioner also relied on the Full Bench judgment in J. Ilayas and Another Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu & Others (W.P.(MD) No. 24333 of 2025), asserting that the statutory proceeding under the Gazette has become infructuous and the one‑year term has expired.
  • Counsel for the respondents (Avinash Wadhwani) maintained that the Gazette was validly issued and that the issues raised are sub‑judice before the Tribunal.
  • The Court examined Sections 65(2), 66, and 83(2) & (5) of the Wakf Act, noting that aggrieved persons may approach the Tribunal, which now has the jurisdiction to consider the validity of the Scheme, the Board’s authority, the Resolution, and the Gazette Notification.

Final Outcome

  • The writ petition is dismissed on the ground that the matter is pending before the Wakf Tribunal (O.A. No. 42 of 2024). The Court refrains from expressing any opinion on the merits and does not grant the blanket mandamus sought.
  • No costs are awarded to either party.
  • The connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.

Topics: Wakf Management, Judicial Review