IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 279 of 2025 With R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 283 of 2025 With R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 284 of 2025 With R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 286 of 2025 With R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 290 of 2025 With R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 301 of 2025 ========================================================== SARKHEJ ROZA COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED TRUSTEE/ MUTAWALLI Versus UKARSINGH MEGHSINGH & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: RIZWAN SHAIKH(7146) for the Petitioner DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2 MR VA BUKHARI(2891) for the Opponent(s) No. 3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 03/03/2026 COMMON ORAL ORDER 1. The issues raised in these group of petitions are interlinked involving identical factual matrix, common disputes and subsequently stand on same footing and therefore, with the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, all these petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 2. This batch of petitions led u/s 83(9) of the Waqf Act, p. 1 1995 challenging impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Waqf Tribunal in Waqf suits, whereby the learned Tribunal, in exercise of jurisdiction under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short “the Code”), rejected the plaint on the ground of paying insu0icient Court fees for the purpose of jurisdiction and Court fee, after giving su0icient opportunity to make good. 3. These revisions are led mainly on the ground that provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 would not apply to the Waqf suit led under the Waqf Act and subsequently, since there is no provision made in the Waqf Act to pay Court fee in Waqf suit. The learned Tribunal has committed serious and manifest error to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code. 4. It is noticeable that in the Waqf suit, the original plainti0 has asked the relief to recover vacant and peaceful possession of the demised premises along with mesne prot. The suits are led without paying su0icient Court fees and the suits were not properly valued for the purpose of jurisdiction and Court fee. 5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 6. In their utter fairness, learned advocates appearing for the respective parties submit that the issue raised in these petitions are squarely covered and governed by the judgment delivered by this Court dated 17.12.2025 rendered in CRA No.84 of 2025 and other allied matters and therefore, there is p. 2 no need to pass any reasoned order repeating same reasons assigned by this Court in the aforestated judgment. Thus, they pray that all these petitions be disposed of by observing that the reasons ascribed by this Court in CRA No.84 of 2025 and other allied matters be governed for disposal of these petitions. 7. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submitted that not pressing for reiteration of some reasons, as held by this Court, may not come in the way of the petitioners herein to pursue challenge against these reasons. 8. Under the circumstances, the reasons ascribed by this Court in judgment delivered by this Court dated 17.12.2025 rendered in CRA No.84 of 2025 and other allied matters shall pari passu govern and apply for disposal of present petitions treating the same reasons as reasons ascribed for disposal of present petitions. 9. Resultantly, present petitions being devoid of merits, stand dismissed accordingly. Notice discharged. 10. Registry to maintain copy of this order in each matter. (J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE p. 3 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 03/03/2026 14:51:42