Unpublished Wakaf Survey Report Does Not Attain Finality, Only Gazette-Published List Is Conclusive: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a survey report submitted by a Special Officer under the Wakaf Act does not attain finality unless it is forwarded to the concerned committee and published in the Government Gazette. The Court clarified that what becomes conclusive and final is the list of wakafs published in the Gazette, not the observations or recommendations made...
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a survey report submitted by a Special Officer under the Wakaf Act does not attain finality unless it is forwarded to the concerned committee and published in the Government Gazette. The Court clarified that what becomes conclusive and final is the list of wakafs published in the Gazette, not the observations or recommendations made in the survey report.
The Court was hearing two writ petitions arising out of a long-standing dispute regarding the management and entitlement to properties pertaining to two shrines in Kishtwar. The petitioners claimed that a 1969 report of a Special Officer appointed under the repealed J&K Muslim Wakaf Act, 1959 had attained finality and could not be reopened by subsequent proceedings.
The bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,
“What becomes conclusive and final is the list of wakafs published in the Government gazette and not the observations of the Special Officer made in his report in respect of any property, which is not included by the officer in the list of Wakafs. Therefore, report dated 09.08.1969 can, by no stretch of reasoning, be stated to have attained the status of finality.”
The petitioners claimed to be Sajjada Nasheens of two shrines and asserted that the properties were their personal properties, not wakaf. They relied upon a report dated August 9, 1969 submitted by a Special Officer appointed under the Act of 1959, wherein the officer had observed that the two ziarats had attained a separate and independent position. The petitioners contended that this report had become final and binding, and could not be reopened by the Special Officer appointed under the Act of 1978.
Court's Observation:
The Court examined the statutory scheme under the Act of 1959. Section 4(3) required the Special Officer to submit a report to the Government containing particulars of wakafs. Section 5 provided that upon receipt of the report, the Government had to forward it to the committee constituted under the Act, which would examine the report. Thereafter, the report had to be published in the Government Gazette. Sub-section (4) of Section 6 made the list of wakafs published under sub-section (2) of Section 5 final and conclusive, the Court underscored.
Applying this scheme, the Court found that the 1969 report was never forwarded to the concerned committee nor was it published in the Government Gazette. The Court noted that the Special Officer's observations regarding the separate status of the ziarats and his recommendation that the Sajjada Nasheens be included as representatives were beyond his statutory jurisdiction.
The Court recorded,
“…. In the present case, the Government has, at no point of time, forwarded the report dated 09.08.1969 issued by the Special Officer to the concerned committee nor has it been published in the Government gazette…. Therefore, report dated 09.08.1969 can, by no stretch of reasoning, be stated to have attained the status of finality so as to attract a follow up action by the Government or any other authority”
The Court held that the petitioners' claim of finality was without substance. The mere submission of a report by the Special Officer does not amount to finality, the statutory process of examination by the committee and publication in the Gazette is essential for the list of wakafs to become conclusive.
The Court thus dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the petitioners had not succeeded in showing that the two shrines and attached properties were their personal property. The Court affirmed that the properties qualify as wakaf property. The challenge to the vires of the repealed Wakaf Acts was rendered infructuous.
Case Title: Syed Lutfullah Shah & Anr. v. A.W. Kirpak Supdt. Engineer & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL)