1 2026:CGHC:26097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3100 of 2026 Mohd. Ajmal Khan S/o Taiyum Khan Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No.18, Beach Para, Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Minority Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board Through - Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board Office At Ambedkar Chowk, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Collector Kabirdham District- Kabirdharam (C.G.) 4 - Hanif Khan S/o Rajjak Khan Aged About 38 Years Mutawalli Jama Masjid Muslim Trust Kawardha District- Kabirdham (C.G.) R/o Ward No.22, Nawab Mohalla Kawardha District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate For State : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Deputy Advocate General For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 25.06.2026 1. By filing the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the illegal and arbitrary action of respondent No.4 in carrying out construction over the waqf property situated at Nazul Sheet No.17, YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.06.25 18:30:31 +0530 2 Bhukhand No.185, admeasuring 350 sq. mts., near the premises of Jama Masjid Muslim Trust, Kawardha, allegedly contrary to the proposal approved by the Muslim community and despite the recommendation dated 18.03.2026 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board directing the District Collector, Kabirdham to immediately stop such construction. The petitioner further calls in question the inaction on the part of respondent No.3 in not taking appropriate steps in accordance with law to prevent the alleged unauthorized construction and seeks a direction for immediate stoppage of the said construction work. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ of any other nature, Order, or Direction directing the District Collector, Kabirdam, District Kabirdham (C.G.) [Respondent No. 03] to immediately act upon the letter/recommendation ANNEXURE P/1 dated 18.03.2026 passed by the Chief Executive Officer (C.E.O) of the Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board, Raipur (C.G.) in accordance with the law. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ of any other nature, Order, or Direction directing the District Collector, Kabirdam, District Kabirdham (C.G.) to immediately stop/stay any further illegal construction work being carried out by the 3 delinquent Mutawalli Respondent No. 04 with respect to the construction & allotment of the disputed shops over the waqf property - Nazul Sheet No. 17, Bhukhand No. 185, admeasuring 350 sq. mts. situated near the premises of the Jama Masjid Muslim Trust Kawardha District Kabirdham (C.G.). 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction directing the respondent authorities to restore the waqf property -Nazul Sheet No. 17, Bhukhand No. 185, admeasuring 350 sq. mts. to its original form. 10.4 Compensation to the petitioner for the financial loss & the mental agony caused to him due to the unauthorized and illegal actions of the respondents. 10.5 Cost of the Petition. 10.6 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the specific communication/recommendation dated 18.03.2026 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh State Waqf Board, directing the District Collector, Kabirdham to stop the construction being carried out over the premises of Jama Masjid Muslim Trust, Kawardha, no effective action has been taken against the concerned Mutawalli. He would further submit that the petitioner 4 has already approached the Chhattisgarh Waqf Tribunal, Raipur by filing an application under Section 83(2) of the Waqf Act, 1995 challenging the alleged unauthorized construction. However, the said application is still pending consideration before the Tribunal. According to the petitioner, he was informed that the matter could not be taken up for final consideration on account of non- availability of the requisite quorum of Members of the Tribunal. In such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate directions. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner pertains to the management and administration of waqf property, legality of construction activities being carried out thereon, and the actions of the Mutawalli in relation to such property. It is submitted that an efficacious and statutory alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under the provisions of the Waqf Act before the competent Waqf Tribunal. He would further submit that the Waqf Tribunal is presently functioning with all three Members and is fully competent to adjudicate all questions relating to waqf property, management thereof, alleged unauthorized construction, allotment of shops and any consequential relief sought by the petitioner. It is further submitted that proceedings/application at the instance of the petitioner are already pending before the competent Tribunal and, therefore, instead of invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner ought 5 to pursue the remedy available before the Tribunal. Thus, it is prayed that the present writ petition be disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that since the petitioner has already invoked the jurisdiction of the competent Waqf Tribunal by filing appropriate proceedings under the provisions of the Waqf Act, the present writ petition is not maintainable. He would submit that parallel proceedings in respect of the same cause of action cannot be permitted and the petitioner is required to pursue the remedy already availed before the Waqf Tribunal in accordance with law. 5. In turn, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the competent Waqf Tribunal to consider and decide the pending proceedings expeditiously within a stipulated period, as according to him the matter has been pending since January, 2026 and concerns alleged construction over waqf property. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and particularly taking note of the fact that the dispute raised in the present writ petition pertains to waqf property and issues connected with the management, administration and utilization thereof, for which a specific statutory remedy is available 6 before the competent Waqf Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition on merits. More so, when it is not in dispute that the petitioner has already approached the competent Tribunal and the matter is stated to be pending consideration since January, 2026. 8. In view of the availability of an efficacious alternative remedy and the pendency of proceedings before the competent Waqf Tribunal, the petitioner is relegated to avail and pursue the statutory remedy available under the provisions of the Waqf Act. 9. Accordingly, the competent Waqf Tribunal is directed to consider and decide the pending proceedings/application, if the same has not already been decided, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims and all questions are left open to be adjudicated by the competent Tribunal. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/-d/-- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh