(1) cra-49-2024.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.49 OF 2024 Shaikh Iliyas S/o Shaikh Masum, Age- 45 Years, Occ:- Agri./Mutawalli, R/o- Sayyad Galli, Majalgaon, Tq. Majalgaon & Dist. Beed ..Applicant Versus 1. Maharashtra State Board of Waqf, Through Chief Executive Officer, Panchakki, Aurangabad. 2. The District Waqf Officer, Beed, C/o. MSBW Chief Executive Officer, Panchaki, Aurangabad ..Respondents … Mr. S. S. Nade, Advocate for the Applicant. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are served. … CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : 11th MARCH, 2025. ORDER:- 1. The applicant impugns order dated 19.10.2023 passed by Waqf Tribunal, Aurangabad below Exhibit-1 in Waqf Application No.19/2023, thereby dismissing Waqf Application. 2. The applicant instituted Waqf Application No.19/2023 under Section 83(2) of Waqf Act, 1995 contending that he is interested person as defined under Section 3(k) of Waqf Act and has right to file application regarding Waqf Institution. According to applicant, Waqf Board has registered Waqf Institution, but illegally registered Survey Nos.556 and 610 as Waqf properties without documentary evidence as to ownership of Waqf. The land Survey Nos.556 and 610 are private properties and District Waqf Officer had no right to seek registration of same as Waqf properties under 2025:BHC-AUG:7546 (2) cra-49-2024.odt Section 36 of Waqf Act. The applicant further contends that Government Gazette dated 24.01.1974 registers Mazar Sajan Sarmas, graveyard, Maheboob Gunj Beed vide Serial No.59 as Waqf. The details of immovable properties are blank. However, without perusal of Government Gazette, lands admeasuring 11 acres from Survey No.556 and 7 acres from Survey No.610 situated at Dharur, District Beed are registered as Waqf properties on the basis of application given by District Waqf Officer dated 11.09.2007. Accordingly, applicant sought relief that order of Registration No.MSBW/127/2007 to the extent of lands Survey Nos.556 and 610 situated at Dharur be deleted from register of Waqf. 3. In pursuance to aforesaid application, on scrutiny, office of Waqf Tribunal raised objections regarding maintainability of application, so also limitation. In light of same, Waqf Tribunal passed impugned order of dismissal of application as not maintainable. 4. The learned Advocate appearing for applicant submits that applicant is interested person within meaning of Section 3(k) of Waqf Act. The applicant has no objection for registration of Waqf, however, he is aggrieved by order including suit properties as Waqf properties in absence of evidence in support of such registration. He submits that enquiry as contemplated under Section 36 of the (3) cra-49-2024.odt Waqf Act was not undertaken before registering suit properties as Waqf properties. 5. Having considered submissions advanced, it can be observed that Section 3(k) of Waqf Act defines person interested in Waqf, which reads thus: 3. Definitions.—In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (k) “person interested in a 1[waqf]” means any person who is entitled to receive any pecuniary or other benefits from the 1[waqf] and includes— (i) any person who has a right to 3[offer prayer] or to perform any religious rite in a mosque, idgah, imambara, dargah, 4[khanqah, peerkhana and karbala], maqbara, graveyard or any other religious institution connected with the 1[waqf] or to participate in any religious or charitable institution under the 1[waqf]; (ii) the 5[waqif] and any descendant of the 5[waqif] and the mutawalli; 6. The definition of an "interested person" is broad enough to include even a devotee. The overall scheme of the Act indicates that jurisdiction under Section 83 of the Waqf Act can be invoked by any person interested in Waqf. Even a person aggrieved by any order passed under Waqf Act can invoke such jurisdiction if order affects their rights. Bare reading of application filed by applicant before Waqf Tribunal shows that applicant is seeking relief against registration of suit properties in the name of Waqf. The applicant has no personal interest in those properties, but he is advancing cause of private persons, who are either in occupation of properties (4) cra-49-2024.odt or having interest in those properties. By invoking jurisdiction under Section 83(2) of Waqf Act, he is not advancing cause of Waqf Institution in whose favour properties have been registered. In such case, applicant cannot say that he is interested person and advancing cause in the interest of Waqf. The Waqf Tribunal has rightly observed that applicant has filed present application for protection of rights of private individuals and not for protection of properties of Waqf Institution and his right to invoke jurisdiction of Tribunal has been eclipsed by private interest. 7. The Tribunal has also opined that application was beyond period of limitation, since it assails order of registration passed in year 2007 by invoking jurisdiction of Waqf Tribunal in the year 2023. The Tribunal records that in view of Article 137 of Limitation Act application is barred by limitation and in absence of prayer for condonation of delay, it cannot be entertained. The Tribunal has, therefore, rightly invoked Rule 54 of Maharashtra Waqf Rules, 2022 and dismissed application without issuing notice to respondents. No jurisdictional error is pointed out in the impugned order. 8. Consequently, Civil Revision Application sans merit and stands rejected. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/March-2025