Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea To Restrain Judicial Orders Allowing Pujas At Aland Dargah In Karnataka

The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a writ petition seeking to restrain the passing of judicial orders allowing the performance of pujas associated with Hinduism at Karnataka's Aland Dargah. The Court dismissed the plea as withdrawn, noting that Article 32 of the Constitution cannot be invoked in this matter.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma was hearing a writ petition filed by one Khaleel Ansari, who is stated to be the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the Dargah Hazrath Malikul Mashaikh Makdoom Ladle Ansari (Sunni).

According to the petitioner, although the property was already declared as a Waqf property by the Waqf Tribunal, there was a pattern of various third parties filing writ petitions and other applications before the High Court seeking permission to conduct pujas on specific occasions. The High Court has passed orders allowing ad-hoc arrangements for the performance of rituals from time to time, including the upcoming Shivratri on February 15. 

The petitioner argued that such interferences would amount to changing the religious character of the property, in violation of the Places of Worship Act. The petitioner sought a direction to protect the Waqf character of dargah and prevent the passing of orders allowing the other rituals in the premises.

The petitioner prayed for directions to prevent any unlawful entry, mobilisation, congregation by the private respondents in the property as well as restrain on any interim orders permitting entry, puja, inspection, survey, construction, installation or alteration of the religious character of the property while the appeal against the Waqf declaration is pending. The petitioner also relied on the order passed by the Supreme Court in December 2024 barring Courts from entertaining new petitions questioning the religious character of properties.

Senior Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, for the petitioner, submitted that the High Court matters are already decided and the petitioner is constrained to approach the top Court due to the applicability of the doctrine of res judicata. "Now the courts can't entertain these matters", she said.

Unconvinced, Justice Datta said, "Unless it's a pan-India issue, [no]...You get the dismissal, thereafter we will consider. This is no way of entertaining Article 32 [petition], just because High Court has...Article 32 was not designed for this...that some orders are passed in Karnataka High Court and that would apply as red judicata".

Makhija responded that the petitioner was drawing on his religious rights under Article 26. "If High Court dismisses your petition, you are most welcome", replied Justice Datta. The judge noted that the petitioner, under Article 32, was seeking a declaration that the suit property was a duly notified waqf property, which has to be done by the Waqf Tribunal.

At this point, Makhija explained that the Waqf Tribunal has already declared the property to be a Waqf. Despite being decreed, she said, third parties file writ petitions every year (since 2023) and reliefs are sought prior to Maha Shivratri.

Makhija also submitted that the case involves various issues related to the Places of Worship Act and requested it may be tagged with the matters related to the PoW Act. But the bench declined. Ultimately, it dismissed the case as withdrawn.

As per averments in the petition, the subject property is the grave of Hazrath Mardan-e-Gaib (R.A.) and was notified as a waqf property in 1976. The notification was never challenged and attained statutory finality. In 1968, the Town Municipal Council, after spot inspection, rejected an application seeking permission to construct a Samadhi/temple within the Dargah compound. It recorded that the site was the Mazaar of Hazrath Mardan-e-Gaib surrounded by Muslim graves, with no documentary basis for any non-Wakf construction.

The petitioner claimed that there have been successive attempts to reopen the religious character of the shrine through civil litigation, but all of them failed. "Communal mobilization" was also attempted, as in 2022, respondent No.7-Shree Siddalingaswamy Karuneswar Temple at Andola announced an "Aland Chalo" padayatra to "cleanse a Shivalinga" at the Mazaar (grave) on Mahashivaratri.

The Managing Committee moved the Karnataka Waqf Tribunal seeking permanent injunction, which suit was decreed in 2024. The decree however is pending challenge.

The petitioner averred that the decree was sought to be rendered meaningless by way of festival-specific applications, such as the one seeking permission to perform puja on Maha Shivratri.

The plea also referred to a suit filed in January 2026 seeking a declaration that Samadhi of Saint Raghav Chaitannya exists within the dargah as well as injunctive relief permitting renovation, construction and worship. It further mentioned an ad hoc arrangement made by the High Court in 2025, permitting 15 identified individuals to offer prayers, subject to status quo and prohibition on installation/construction. It was averred that the petitioner in that case was "emboldened" by this ad hoc arrangement to seek similar reliefs in 2026 as an annual entitlement.

"The petitioner's fundamental right to worship at the dargah, to maintain the sanctity and religious character of the Dargah is thus being eroded through a thousand cuts, each interim order, each temporary arrangement chipping away at the finality of the decree dated 06.06.2024 which operates in rem and the constitutional autonomy of the Waqf institution", the plea stated.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, Advocates Shariq Ahmed and Adnan Yousuf

Case Title: KHALEEL ANSARI Versus STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 197/2026