9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ahabad dated 5-8-2010 in Special Appeal No. 973 of 2010. By that judgment the ex-parte interim orders of the Single Judge of the High Court dated 11-6-2010 and 18-6-2010 passed in Writ Petition No. 34595/2010 have been set aside. 4. The brief facts of the case are that there is a Dargah known as "Dargah Hazrat Syed Salar Masood Ghazi R.A.' in district Bahraich, U.P. which is managed by the Committee of Management of Waqf No. 19. 5. The petitioner claims to be the proprietor of circuses e.g. Great Gemini Circus, Apollo Circus, Raj Mahal Circus and Asiad Circus, and also runs a Jhoola (cradle) for entertaining the public at large. The petitioner does touring and runs the aforesaid circuses and jhoola in 'Melas' and other places of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us, Jhoola, Merry go round, swing for amusement area for the children and visitors of Mela in the premises of Dargah Sharif during the annual Urs in the month of Jeth (May and June). Accordingly the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are directed to allot land in the Mela at waqf No. 19, Dargah Sharif, Bahraich over Plot Nos. 1760 to 1770 and 1826 to 1884, details of which have been given in the writ petition, to the petitioner for the purpose of running Circus, Jhoola, Merry go round swing etc. If the petitioner pays required rent lease, the possession of the allocated land shall be handed over the petitioner within 3 days. Order Date :- 11-6-2010". 9. The order dated 18-6-2010 reads as follows : "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question is in the district of Bahraich which is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. Hence, the writ petition could not have been validly filed or entertained in the Allahabad Bench of the High Court in view of the decision of this court in Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal - AIR 1976 SC 331. (2) The writ petition was not maintainable because ordinarily no writ petition lies against a private body. (3) By the ex-parte order dated 11-6-2010 the writ petition has been practically allowed since by that ex-parte order the respondents 2, 3 & 4 (U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, District Magistrate, Bahraich and Committee of Management, Waqf No. 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der of the District Magistrate. This writ petition was dismissed on 28-5-2010 by the following order of the Division Bench of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court : "Court No. -1 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 5245 of 2010 Petitioner :- Raza Khan S/O. Fateh Khan Respondent :- District Magistrate/Additional Waqf Commissioner, Bahraich Petitioner Counsel :- M. A. Khan Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C, M. Sayeed, U.K. Srivastava Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J. Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. After hearing the argument at length, we are satisfied that this second writ petition for the same relief is not maintainable, as earlier, the writ petition filed by the petitioners for the same relief, has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pursue his application with the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date: 28-5-2010" 12. The petitioner then filed a Civil Suit being Suit No. 54/70/10 of 2010 titled 'Raza Khan v. Managing Committee, Waqf No. 19, Waqf Dargah etc. before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hamirpur. It may be mentioned that Hamirpur lies within the territorial jurisdiction of the Allahabad Bench of the High Court and not the Lucknow bench, whereas the property in question is situate at Bahraich which is under the jurisdiction of the Lucknow Bench. 13. On the suit being presented, the Munsarim made a report that the suit was not cognizable at Hamirpur for lack of territorial jurisdiction. The petitioner took time to file a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s relationship. 18. There are other serious complaints also against some Judges of the High Court. 19. The Allahabad High Court really needs some house cleaning (both Allahabad and Lucknow Bench), and we request Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High Court to do the needful, even if he has to take some strong measures, including recommending transfers of the incorrigibles. 20. We entirely agree with the view taken by the Learned Division Bench in the impugned judgment. In view of the foregoing, we find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. 21. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Registrar Generals/Registrars of all High Courts for being placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the respective High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
