Gujarat HC disposes of PIL challenging Wakf Tribunal member’s appointment

The state government affidavit said, “The appointment was made on priority basis, whereby the Wakf Tribunal came to be constituted after a lapse of a significant period… However, at that time, it was thought that the Section 83(4) of the Wakf Act, 1995, provides for the quorum of three members and therefore, the removal of any member prior to effecting any amendment in the said provision would result in jeopardising the functioning of the tribunal.”

The state informed the court that the Legal Department had moved a file to the state government proposing the amendment in the Wakf Tribunal Rules, whereby Rule 71 was proposed to be substituted to allow the vacancy of any member other than the Chairman without coming in the way of the functioning of the Tribunal. The Legal Secretary, Secretariat, informed the court that the amendment was notified by the state government on August 16 and “immediately thereafter, the services of (Shaikh) came to be discontinued with effect from August 17.”

Considering the affidavit of the Legal Department, the HC held that the original Writ Petition as well as the subsequent suo motu PIL of court had been rendered “infructuous”.
On August 9, Shaikh’s counsel, Brijesh Trivedi had made assertions before the court about the locus of the petitioners, claiming themselves as ‘Mutawallis’ (manager/trustee), to file writ petition. The court, considering the “seriousness” of the pendency of the criminal cases against Shaikh, had converted the PIL into a suo
motu one.

In its order, dated September 6, a bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi said, “We render the present Public Interest Litigation as infructuous as with the cancellation of appointment of (Shaikh), the cause of action for filing the PIL does not survive. The writ petition filed in the nature of PIL is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.”
Stating that the court had noted the submission of Shaikh’s lawyer Brijesh Trivedi that two proceedings instituted by Shaikh’s wife had been brought to their logical end, the court said, “The fact remains that (Shaikh) was not found to be fit for being appointed as Member of the Wakf Tribunal on account of pending criminal cases against him at the time of seeking appointment the services of the respondent has been discontinued with effect from August 17, 2024.”

On August 9, the HC also directed the Legal Department “to provide complete information regarding the stages of criminal cases alongwith the order sheets as well as the entire record of the cases pertaining to the two applications for maintenance filed by the wife of (Shaikh)”

The court also said, “Lastly, on the assertion made by Brijesh Trivedi, learned advocate for (Shaikh) that on account of the filing of the Public Interest Litigation and the observations made in the order dated August 9 about the pending criminal cases against the petitioner and that the statement that warrant under Section 70 of the Code of Criminal Procedure issued by the competent Court, the social image of the respondent has been tarnished. Suffice it note that none of the observations made in the order dated August 9, 2024, have the effect of branding respondent as a convict. In the said paragraph, we have only reproduced what has been noted from the affidavit of the Joint Secretary, Legal Department, State of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, about the stages of criminal cases filed against (Shaikh) and there is no dispute about the fact of pendency of the criminal cases. No clarification as such is
required…”