Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Asif Ali Shaikh Hussain, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the order dated 16.10.2018 passed by the 3rd respondent (Regional Commissioner, Bangalore Division) in Case No. ELN/CR/44/(14)/2018-19, which rejected his nomination to contest the election to the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf under the category of Muslim member of the Bar Council (Karnataka State) as per Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the Waqf Act, 1995. The petitioner also sought a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to permit him to vote, contest, and participate in the upcoming election. The petitioner contended that he was a Muslim advocate enrolled with the Karnataka State Bar Council and that his name appeared in the voters' list. The 3rd respondent rejected his nomination on the ground that he was not a member of the Karnataka State Bar Council. The court observed that the impugned order was passed without application of mind and without considering the material on record, including the petitioner's enrollment as an advocate and his name in the voters' list. The court held that the order was arbitrary and unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to vote, contest, and participate in the election.
Headnote
A) Waqf Law - Election to Board of Auqaf - Nomination Rejection - Section 14(1)(b)(iii) Waqf Act, 1995 - The petitioner, a Muslim advocate, filed nomination to contest election as a Muslim member of the Bar Council for membership of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf. The 3rd respondent rejected the nomination on the ground that the petitioner was not a member of the Karnataka State Bar Council. The court held that the impugned order was passed without application of mind and without considering the material on record, including the petitioner's enrollment as an advocate and his name in the voters' list. The court quashed the order and directed the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to vote, contest, and participate in the election. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India - The High Court exercised its writ jurisdiction to quash an order passed by the Regional Commissioner acting as Electoral Registration Officer for the election to the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf. The court found that the order was arbitrary and without application of mind, and thus liable to be set aside. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 16.10.2018 passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting the petitioner's nomination to contest the election to the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf under the category of Muslim member of the Bar Council is valid and sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 16.10.2018 passed by the 3rd respondent in Case No. ELN/CR/44/(14)/2018-19 is quashed. The 3rd respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to vote, contest, and participate in the upcoming election of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf under the category of Muslim member of the Bar Council (Karnataka State) for membership of Karnataka State Board of Auqaf as per Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the Waqf Act, 1995.
Law Points
- Election law
- Waqf Board
- Nomination rejection
- Non-application of mind
- Section 14(1)(b)(iii) Waqf Act
- 1995
- Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India
