The Kerala High Court on Friday declined to grant interim relief against the State Government’s decision to reconstitute the Kerala State Waqf Board, observing that the notification had already been implemented and the newly appointed members had assumed office.
A Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji was hearing appeals filed by former Board chairman K.S. Hamza and former member C.K. Usman Haji challenging a Single Judge’s refusal to stay the government’s October 16 order appointing nine new members to the Board.
The Bench issued notice before admission to the respondents, including members of the reconstituted Board, through a special messenger and posted the matter for further hearing on October 29.
Senior Advocate S. Sreekumar and Advocate P. Chandrasekhar appeared for the appellants, while Advocate General K. Jaju Babu represented the State Government.
Seeking interim protection, counsel for the appellants challenged the State’s decision to replace the existing Board members. The Bench, however, declined to suspend the government notification, noting that the reconstitution had already taken effect.
The dispute also raised questions about the scope of earlier proceedings before another Division Bench dealing with public interest litigations concerning the composition of the Waqf Board. During Friday’s hearing, the Advocate General referred to those proceedings and submitted that the State had informed the Bench hearing the PILs about its proposed move to reconstitute the Board.
Justice Devan Ramachandran clarified that the earlier Division Bench had merely recorded the State’s submission regarding its intention to undertake the reconstitution; it had not expressly directed the government to do so.
The Bench observed that the earlier proceedings concerned whether the Board’s composition complied with the applicable law. The question before it was whether the existing Board was legally constituted and, depending on that determination, whether the PILs warranted dismissal or appropriate directions.
The State had subsequently decided to reconstitute the Board on its own, the Bench noted.
The present appeals arise from two writ petitions filed by Hamza and Usman Haji challenging the October 16 government order, which superseded two earlier notifications relating to the appointment of the Board’s chairperson and members.
On October 17, a Single Judge of the High Court had declined to stay the reconstitution but directed that the new arrangement would remain subject to the outcome of the pending writ petitions. The petitions were also referred to a Division Bench already examining related challenges to the Board’s composition.
The appellants have questioned the State’s authority to terminate the existing members’ appointments and replace them without following the statutory procedure governing removal of members and supersession of the Board. Their challenge invokes provisions of the amended Waqf law, including Sections 15, 20 and 99, concerning tenure and the removal of members.
The government, on the other hand, has maintained that the earlier Board’s composition did not satisfy the statutory requirements under Section 14, particularly those relating to representation of different Muslim communities. It has defended its decision as an exercise of its authority to cancel the earlier appointments and constitute the Board afresh in accordance with law.
The Division Bench indicated that it would examine, at this stage, whether the Single Judge was justified in referring the writ petitions to the Division Bench or ought to have adjudicated them independently.
The High Court has not finally determined the legality of the State Government’s decision to reconstitute the Board. The validity of the October 16 notification and the competing statutory interpretations remain subject to further proceedings.
The post Kerala High Court declines interim stay on Waqf board reconstitution, issues notice to newly appointed members appeared first on India Legal.