- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5634 WP No. 5423 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 5423 OF 2020 (GM-WAKF) BETWEEN: SRI BUDANSHA MAKANDAR S/O SRI ROSHAN SHA MAKAKNDAR, AGED 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, ADD-ROSHAN GALLI, TALIKOTI, BIJAPUR -586 214. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DALWAI VENKATESH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARNATAKA STATE OF BOARD OF WAKFS, THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NO.6 CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-06. 2. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (ADMN), KARNATAKA STATE OF BOARD OF WAKFS, DARUL AWAKF, NO.6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-06. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SABAHATH SULTANA., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SWATHI ASHOK., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & 2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5634 WP No. 5423 of 2020 ORAL ORDER Sri.Dalwai Venkatesh., counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Sabahath Sultana., counsel on behalf of Smt.Swathi Ashok., for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The order dated:10.05.2019 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-E is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as setout in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care. 4. The petitioner contends that he is the owner and in possession of R.S.No.181, 266/1, 266/10, non agricultural plots No.2 to 6 in R.S.No.660, CTS No.286/A1, 286/A2 and 286/A5 situated at Talikote Village, Muddebihal Taluk, Vijayapura District. Contending that there was interference by the Wakf Board, the petitioner was constrained to initiate proceedings before the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Belagavi in KWT/BJR/SR/OS.8/2013. The Tribunal vide award dated:28.09.2016, decreed the suit and the Wakf Board was - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5634 WP No. 5423 of 2020 restrained by way of permanent injunction from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. The said order was assailed by the Wakf Board before High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench in Civil Revision Petition No.200007/2017. The High Court vide order dated:18.08.2017 dismissed the petition, however liberty was accorded to the Wakf Board to work out their remedies by way of independent suit. It is pivotal to note that the Wakf Board instead of filing an independent suit, initiated proceedings under Section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995 against the petitioner an individual. Upon service of notice, the petitioner appeared before the Special Officer, Karnataka State of Board of Wakf and raised objections about maintainability of the proceedings under Section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995. 5. The impugned order is furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same is marked as Annexure-E. A perusal of the same reflects that except stating that inquiry under Section 40 is permissible, the Special Officer has not addressed the objection regarding maintainability of the proceedings under - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5634 WP No. 5423 of 2020 Section 40 of Act. Therefore, this Court deems it proper to quash the order passed by the second respondent. 6. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:10.05.2019 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-E is quashed. A direction is issued to the Special Officer to consider the petitioner's objection about the maintainability of the proceedings under Section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995 and pass orders strictly adhering to proviso clause of Section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995 in accordance with the law. 7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18