- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 9080 OF 2026 (GM-WAKF) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SHAIK BAHADUR AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, SON OF LATE SHAIK HYDER, RESIDING AT NO.501, RAHMANJI GUEST HOUSE, MANJUNATH NAGAR, 5TH CROSS, BENGALURU NORTH, KALYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. 2. SRIMUNEER AHMED SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, SON OF LATE AHMED SHARIEFF, RESIDING AT NO.40/1, COCKBURN ROAD, BENGALURU NORTH, HKP ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 051. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA BOARD OF WAQFS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NO.6, DARUL AUQAF, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 2. THE CHAIRMAN KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF AUQAF, NO.6, DARUL AUQAF, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052. 3. MUSLIM ORPHANAGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, (TENURE OF MANAGING COMMITTEE IS EXPIRED ON 26.02.2026) NO.43, DICKENSON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 042. …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. USMAN P., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 (VK FILED IN R/O R1) SRI. NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE AND GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS. i) DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 24/02/2026 SUBMITTED BY THESE PETITIONERS FOR APPOINTING CARETAKER OR ADMINISTRATOR TO LOOK AFTER THE AFFAIRS OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION CALLED MUSLIM ORPHANAGE TILL REGULAR NEW MANAGING COMMITTEE IS CONSTITUTED, WHICH ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH FOR THE KIND PERUSAL OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND MARKED AS ANNX-H AND J. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: "i) To issue a writ of mandamus, in the nature of order or direction, directing the respondents to considering the representations dated 24.02.2026 submitted by these petitioners for appointing Caretaker or Administrator to look after the affairs of the third respondent Religious Institution called Muslim Orphanage till regular new Managing Committee is constituted, which are produced herewith for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble court and marked as Annexures-H & J, in the interest of justice and equity. ii) To grant any such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Petitioners are the members of respondent No.3 which is a Muslim orphanage and notified by the respondent No.1/Waqf Board. Petitioners are asserting - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 that the tenure of the earlier managing committee expired on 26.02.2026. Petitioners further claimed that one Syed Ajaz Ahmad was appointed as Election Officer to conduct election to constitute a new Managing committee. The petitioners further contend that a notification was issued on 22.01.2026, notifying the calendar of events to conduct election. Petitioners however contend that due to some hurdles, election to constitute a new managing committee was not conducted on 15.02.2026 as scheduled. It is in this backdrop, petitioners have filed the captioned petition seeking a direction at the hands of this Court to appoint an Administrator to manage respondent No.3-orphanage on the premise that the tenure of the earlier committee has expired and there is no committee to manage day-to-day affairs. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners while arguing this matter on 10.04.2026 contended that the election scheduled on 15.02.2026 has lapsed and therefore the respondent No.3 has to redo the entire - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 election process by issuing a fresh calendar of events. This Court, vide Order dated 10.04.2026 formulated two crucial points thereby staying the election process. 4. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 has filed vacating application on 25.04.2026 and has produced earlier orders to demonstrate that petitioners are in the habit of approaching this Court, questioning the calendar of events, every time a committee constituted completes its tenure and therefore they have a track record of stalling the election proceedings on untenable grounds. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 in response to the points formulated by this Court has straight away placed reliance on the reported judgment rendered by this Court in the case of K. Channaiah and Others vs. State of Karnataka & Others1. Referring to this judgment, he would point out that the question whether the election process if stalled and not conducted on the scheduled date of polling would render infructuous 1 ILR 2000 KAR 2572 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 is effectively dealt and answered by this Court at para 38. He would also place strong reliance on the interim order granted by the coordinate Bench in W.P.No.4833/2026. Adverting to the interim order, he would point out that the Court has clearly directed the respondent No.3 to go ahead with the elections and the only rider is that the conducting elections would be subject to outcome of the writ petition filed by the petitioners and other members of the respondent No.2. 5. This Court vide order dated 10.04.2026 formulated the following two crucial points for consideration: (i) Whether the earlier calendar of events dated 22.01.2026, which had fixed the date of election as 15.02.2026, having admittedly lapsed in the light of the directions issued by this Court, can be treated as subsisting or enforceable; and (ii) Whether respondent No.3-Muslim Orphanage is justified in proceeding to reschedule the election by merely notifying a fresh date, i.e., - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 26.04.2026, without issuing a fresh calendar of events in accordance with the applicable bye-laws and Regulations governing the conduct of elections. 6. Having heard the learned counsel's on record, this Court proceeds to formulate an additional point to be addressed by this Court: (iii) Whether the present petition is maintainable in the light of law laid down by this Court in the reported judgment rendered in K. Channaiah and Others vs. State of Karnataka & Others (supra) and also in the light of directions issued in W.P.No.4833/2026 to conduct elections. 7. Before this Court proceeds further, it would be apposite for this Court to extract the entire order sheet. The same is extracted which reads as under: "Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent No.1 is all petitions and for respondent No.5 also in W.P.No.4940/2026. Sri. P.Usman, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent No.2 in all petitions. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 Issue emergent notice to respondents 3 and 4 in all petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the calendar of events was published on 22.01.2026 in terms of which, the last date for filing of nominations was on 31.01.2026 and the scrutiny of nominations was to be completed on 02.02.2026 and publication of list of eligible contesting candidates was to be made on 02.02.2026 immediately after scrutiny. 3. It is submitted that after withdrawal of nominations, the allotment of symbols and publication of final list of contesting candidates was to be made on 03.02.2026 at 05.00 p.m. and accordingly, the allotment of symbols was made as per the proceedings on 03.02.2026 and the arrangement in the ballot paper of the candidates was ordered to be as per Annexure-C. It is submitted that the same was published on 03.02.2026. It is submitted that the candidates have campaigned on the basis of such arrangement as made out at Annexures-B and C. 4. It is submitted that the polling is scheduled on 15.02.2026 and all of a sudden, certain proceedings were held as evidenced at Annexure-D on 09.02.2026 and rearrangement of the syndicate members in the ballot has been made as per Annexure-E on 09.02.2026. It is submitted that there could be no change at this fag end of the election process when campaign has continued in terms of Annexure-C from 03.02.2026 till the sudden change on 09.02.2026. 5. It is to be noticed that though there are certain allegations of misuse by some of the syndicate members as made out at Annexure-D, however, any action in violation of the code of conduct would be a ground to challenge the election - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 and cannot lead to changing the arrangement of syndicate members as made out in the ballot at Annexure-C. Further, the proceedings of the meeting would not indicate that there is a conclusive finding as regards the alleged mischief. If that were to be so, question of taking any action pursuant to Annexure-D at the fag end of the election process doesn't arise. 6. Accordingly, there would be stay of rearrangement of syndicate members in the ballot as shown at Annexure-E and the elections are to proceed in terms of the arrangement of the syndicate as per Annexure-C. Needless to state, results that are to be announced would be subject to orders to be passed. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.No.4940/2026 submits that there has been change in the electoral list which alters the playing field. 8. However, since the petition has been filed at the fag end, interim relief at such stage cannot be considered. Needless to state that the election held would be subject to outcome of the present proceedings." (emphasis supplied) 8. At the outset, this Court deems it necessary to advert to the earlier proceedings extracted supra, particularly the order passed in W.P.No.4833/2026, wherein this Court had unequivocally permitted the election process to proceed in terms of the notified - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 calendar of events, subject, however, to the final outcome of the writ proceedings. The said order, which has attained binding force inter parties, clearly demonstrates that this Court had consciously declined to interdict the election process at the penultimate stage and had instead balanced equities by protecting the rights of the parties by making the results subject to adjudication. 9. In the teeth of such a categorical order, it is rather disquieting that the present petitioners, who are not strangers but active participants in the electoral process, having filed their nominations and contested the elections, have chosen to institute the present writ petition seeking appointment of an Administrator. The relief now sought is not only inconsistent with their earlier conduct but also strikes at the very root of the democratic process which had already been set in motion. Once the calendar of events is notified and the electoral process has commenced, the settled principle is that Courts must exercise extreme circumspection and refrain from - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 interdicting the process midstream, save in exceptional circumstances of manifest illegality. The present case, far from disclosing such exceptional grounds, reveals a calculated attempt to derail the election process. 10. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioners were parties to the earlier round of litigation and were fully aware of the directions issued by this Court. Having acquiesced to the continuation of the election process and having themselves participated therein, the petitioners are estopped from turning around and seeking to stall the very same process by resorting to an indirect device. Such conduct, in the considered view of this Court, is not only legally untenable but also borders on abuse of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 11. This Court further finds that the present writ petition is nothing but a second attempt to achieve indirectly what could not be achieved directly in the earlier - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 proceedings. The law is well-settled that successive writ petitions on the same cause of action, more so when dressed in a different garb, cannot be entertained. The petitioners, by seeking appointment of an Administrator in the midst of the election process, have in effect sought to nullify the earlier order of this Court permitting the elections to proceed. Such an approach is clearly impermissible and amounts to forum shopping and abuse of process. 12. That apart, this Court has already taken note, in the earlier proceedings, of the necessity to proceed with the elections even if certain grievances subsist, by safeguarding the rights of the parties through appropriate directions. In the light of such a considered view already expressed, the present petition lacks bona fides and appears to be motivated by an oblique intent to stall the elections. The points framed for consideration are, therefore, liable to be answered against the petitioners. Accordingly, point Nos.(i) and (ii) are answered in the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 affirmative, holding that the petition is devoid of merit and constitutes an abuse of process, and point No.(iii) is answered in the negative. 13. Before parting, this Court deems it appropriate to observe that the duty of candour and fairness to the Court rests equally on litigants and members of the Bar. The submission advanced on behalf of the petitioners that there is no suppression cannot be accepted in its entirety. Mere production of documents, without specifically drawing the attention of the Court to the earlier proceedings and the binding orders passed therein, does not satisfy the requirement of full and fair disclosure. The practice of placing documents on record without proper pleading or citation, thereby leaving it to the Court to discover material facts, cannot be countenanced. 14. This Court is constrained to note that it is already overburdened with an overwhelming docket, with more than a hundred fresh matters listed daily in addition - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 to a substantial number of “moved” matters. In such circumstances, it becomes imperative that counsel appearing before this Court adhere to the highest standards of professional responsibility, ensuring that all relevant facts, especially prior proceedings and orders, are fairly and transparently brought to the notice of the Court at the earliest instance. Any deviation from this standard not only hampers the administration of justice but also results in wastage of precious judicial time. 15. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only), which shall be paid by the petitioners to respondent No.3/Muslim Orphanage within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23167 WP No. 9080 of 2026 (ii) The petitioners shall file a compliance memo before this Court on or before 02.06.2026 evidencing payment of the aforesaid costs; (iii) It is made clear that respondent No.3 is at liberty to proceed with and complete the election process in accordance with law; (iv) In view of dismissal of the writ petition, the interlocutory applications in I.A.Nos.1/2026 and 2/2026 do not survive for consideration and are accordingly rejected. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 6