Dwarka Demolition: Gujarat Govt Seeks To Vacate Status-Quo Order, Says Alleged Religious Structures Being Used To Traffick Explosives

The Gujarat government on Monday (January 20) opposed before the High Court the continuance of a status quo order protecting from any action certain properties which are alleged to be religious structures located in Dwarka, arguing that the structures are being used for trafficking explosives.During the hearing the court also orally enquired into the nature of a property under the Waqf Act as well as the Public Trust Act (PTA). After hearing the matter for some time the court listed it for hearing on Tuesday (January 21). During the hearing, Government Pleader (GP) GH Virk appearing for the State submitted before Justice Mauna M Bhatt that the State has removed all encroachments except for the structure which are subjected to status-quo by the court. He then contended that there are material representations in the writ petition that the State has pointed out in the reply based on contemporaneous record and that it was nothing but an attempt to defraud the court. He then argued that the structures which are being subjected to status-quo are used for "drug trafficking, for trafficking of explosives" and there have been "bomb blasts in the area and the Mujafar of some Dargah was found utilizing the structure for storing explosives".The court then orally said that there appeared to be disputed questions of facts wherein the petitioner has claimed that the property in question is Waqf property while the State has claimed that subject land is Gaucher land (grazing land).Virk said answered that from the PTR (Public Trust Register) produced in the record suggests that the property is question is not Waqf property. Furthermore, he submitted that in one of the petitions it is Gaucher land (grazing land) and in another petition it is a Kabristan (Cemetery). He then argued that how can "one build massive lavish structures on Kabarastan" and relied on the satellite images placed on record through Intelligence Bureau. He then questioned the creation of gated communities and handling of drugs inside such premises.At this stage the petitioner's counsel sought a day's time to file rejoinder in the matter. Meanwhile Virk–appearing for Nagar Palika and the State, said that he was seeking a vacation of the status quo with immediate effect since the petition has been filed on misconceived facts. The Court then orally asked “Where were you till date...the construction is not recent”. The GP contended that it has been done over the last five years and the State is taking steps now. He further submitted these 3 structures are 3 out of 600 structures, and 597 structures are demolished across the board of two different communities and nobody has come forward as it is all on Gaucher land and on Kabristan. He then contended that the State has also demolished temples.The Court then asked, “But the Kabaristan generally belongs to Waqf?”. To this the Virk answered that it is all government land and it is to be used as Kabaristan allotted under the revenue record.At this stage the court asked, “With regard to the Waqf Act, what priority (do) you have over the (land)? Suppose it is registered (land), assuming that it is registered (land), can it be equated with the Indian Trust Act? That I am a Trust, having some property which is registered, so it be used for the beneficiary of the Trustee of the Trust or whosoever is the beneficiary of the Trust. How can you establish the right over the Waqf property?"The Counsel appearing for the Waqf board said that there is distinction between the Public Trust Act and the Waqf Act, wherein a property, though, mentioned in the PTR as Trust property or Waqf property, once the property is registered as Waqf property, it cannot be sold.The Court then asked if the land is registered earlier when the provisions of Public Trust Act were applicable, wherein one needs to register that property under the provisions of the Act with the Public Charitable Institution or if under the provisions of the Trust Act you would register before Waqf. The Counsel then referring to Section 43 of the Waqf Act submitted that whatever registered before the Bombay Trust Act will automatically be governed under Section 43 of the Waqf Act. "So then all provisions of Public Trust Act would go and it would be governed by Waqf Act", the counsel said. The GP then argued that the counsel for the Waqf board is partly correct if some survey number is identified as PTR in Waqf property, in the PTR it is mentioned over time about the Waqf property but then contended the 3 cases before the court are the cases where it is not mentioned in the PTR that the subject property is waqf property. The Court then asked, “Please understand, my question is very clear that, suppose if a X property is registered under PTR, the moment it is written in PTR as Waqf property, it will now go under the Waqf Act? Would that simply absorb the provisions of PTR? Let's see the provision.”The GP then answered that when this property has to be divested or withdrawn...

Dwarka Demolition: Gujarat Govt Seeks To Vacate Status-Quo Order, Says Alleged Religious Structures Being Used To Traffick Explosives

Lovina B Thakkar

Tags