• Home
  • Current News
  • Columns
  • Judiciary
  • Know your law
  • Stories
  • International News
  • Taxation News
  • Voice of Women
  • Home
  • Current News
  • Columns
  • Judiciary
  • Know your law
  • Stories
  • International News
  • Taxation News
  • Voice of Women
Live Adalat
Facebook Twitter Instagram
  • Home
  • Current News
  • Columns
  • Judiciary
  • Know your law
  • Stories
  • International News
  • Taxation News
  • Voice of Women
Live Adalat
Home»Columns»Gujarat High Court refuses to interfere in order on removal of Madrasa by the Surat Municipal Corporation

Gujarat High Court refuses to interfere in order on removal of Madrasa by the Surat Municipal Corporation

0
By Kanika Bhatnagar on May 24, 2022 Columns, Current News, Judiciary, Stories, Top Stories
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram WhatsApp

The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a case brought by a Waqf committee challenging a notice issued by the Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) to remove a madrasa, or Islamic school, that the civic body claims it acquired in 1967.

The court stated that it had no intention of interfering with the religious school’s current process. The Waqf committee, which manages the madrasa in Surat’s Sangrampura area, filed a plea disputing the SMC’s notice to remove the structure, but Justice AY Kogje dismissed it.

“In the opinion of the court, in absence of any evidence on record regarding actual running of educational institution and there is nothing on record to indicate any permission to running educational institution or building permission to put up construction of educational institution and the factual assertion not being controverted that the premises were being used for commercial purpose, the court is not inclined to interfere with the ongoing process, which according to the court is in accordance with the provisions of GDCR.”

On October 1, 2021, the SMC issued a notice to the Waqf committee for the demolition of “illegal construction” on the grounds that the petitioner was a “unauthorised occupant” of the site.

The petitioner, the Madrasa-e-Anwar Rabbani Waqf Committee, filed a petition with the Waqf Tribunal, which awarded a status quo that was periodically renewed. After the SMC filed a reply before the tribunal asserting ownership of the land, the status quo was not prolonged.

On December 29, 2021, the Surat civic authority issued a new notice to the committee, requesting that the construction be removed.

Following that, an executive engineer of the SMC issued an order on March 28, 2022, ordering the madrasa to be demolished within seven days on the grounds that it was built without the authorization of the relevant authority.

The Waqf committee filed a lawsuit at the HC, alleging that the land in question was previously owned by one Ashiq Hussain Abdul Hussain and his five brothers. It stated that they had given the Waqf the right, title, and share of all the brothers through an oral gift deed to establish a madrasa that educated Muslim pupils.

The SMC, on the other hand, claimed that the school’s land was purchased in 1967 for the purpose of developing a garden and a lake in accordance with town planning, and that the original owners were compensated.

The images of the site, according to Justice AY Kogje, did not show the school in operation, but rather the shutters indicated the presence of a commercial establishment (garage). Furthermore, the Gujarat Development Control Regulations, as well as approval from the government, govern the operation of educational institutions.

The Petitioner and other residents of the site appeared to be taking advantage of the lack of revenue records, according to the Bench.

The State Government was encouraged to keep a careful eye on the issue in order to address any errors, including holding public employees accountable.

In response to the impugned notice issued under Section 260(1)(a) of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, the Petitioner further failed to present the State any renovation and “construction completion” certificate.

The Petitioner was unable to produce any documentation demonstrating legitimate occupation, and his property was unable to obtain development licence or regularisation of any kind of building.

The bench therefore, refused to interfere with the process initiated by the State authority and dismissed the petition.

Gujarat High Court Live Adalat Madrasa Surat Municipal Corporation
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Telegram WhatsApp
Previous ArticleSupreme Court orders to setup pilot courts to handle pending Cheque Bounce cases
Next Article Order Reserved on Qutub Minar: Judge said “If Deity Remained without Worship for 800 years, then let it be even further”

Related Posts

Advocate Jaya Sukin writes to AG KK Venugopal for consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Retired Justice & Advocates for the statements on SC‘s oral observation on Nupur Sharma

July 5, 2022

15 retired judges, 77 senior bureaucrats, and 25 retired armed forces officials submitted an open letter to CJI NV Ramana against observation made by Justices Surya Kant & JB Pardiwala in Nupur Sharma case

July 5, 2022

Judges Must Refrain From Making Derogatory Remarks About Parties Unless It Is Absolutely Necessary For Making a Decision: High Court of J&K&L

July 5, 2022

Comments are closed.

The Live Adalat welcomes articles, blog posts and other forms of content. If you are interested in writing for us, joining us please write to us at adalatlive@gmail.com
Top judgements of March
https://liveadalat.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/WhatsApp-Video-2022-03-28-at-16.39.34.mp4
VIEW MORE VIDEOS
INTERESTING LEGAL FACTS
VIEW MORE VIDEOS

Participate in Live Adalat Legal Quiz

Facebook Twitter Instagram

Contact Us

Email : info@liveadalat.com

Subscribe Newsletter

© 2022 Liveadalat.com
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Terms

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Sign In or Register

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below.

Lost password?