ORDER
D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.
1. The petitioner is a Wakf Institution registered under the provisions of Wakf Act, 1954, and is being administered by its Administrator. It functions under the provisions of Wakf Act and supervision of Karnataka State Board of Wakf.
2. The petitioner-institution had initiated action against the second respondent who was a tenant in respect of a portion of the property owned by the petitioner for evicting that tenant under the provisions of Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The competent officer after receipt of the complaint issued notice to the second respondent and held an enquiry which terminated in the eviction order dated 27-4-2001 (copy at Annexure-A).
3. In respect of such an order, the person aggrieved is entitled to prefer an appeal under Section 10(1) of the Act and the appeal lies to the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area.
4. The second respondent who has suffered an order of eviction has preferred an appeal to the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal, Bangalore Division, Bangalore in No. TAC/4/2001-02 under Section 83 of the Wakf Act. The appeal/application was opposed to and the petitioner raised a preliminary objection contending that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal or application of this nature inasmuch as an appeal can be presented under Section 10(1) of the Act only before the District Judge having jurisdiction and not to any other Judge or Tribunal. In respect of such preliminary objection raised on behalf of the petitioner-Wakf Institution, the Tribunal has passed an order dated 11-3-2002 holding that the appeal which has been filed under Section 10(1) of the Act read with Sections 83 and 85 of the Wakf Act is maintainable and further held that it is only that Tribunal which has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and no other Civil Court.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribunal has also granted an order of stay, staying the operation of the order of eviction passed by the competent officer. Aggrieved by this order, the Wakf Institution has approached this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
6. Shri P.S. Mali Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner drawing attention of this Court to the provisions of the Premises Act submits that the appeal if at all can be preferred and should be presented under Section 10(1) and only to the particular officer and before the forum mentioned under the very provision and not to any other Tribunal or Judicial Officer, It is submitted that the action taken in respect of Wakf property is under the provisions of Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, and the appeal also lies under this Act and therefore, the provisions of Wakf Act particularly Sections 83 and 85 of the Act are not attracted to the said situation. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has also no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal nor has jurisdiction to pass any order in respect of the order passed by the competent officer under the provisions of Eviction Act.
7. The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent-tenant fairly concedes that the appeal had been wrongly preferred and was being prosecuted before Wakf Tribunal and makes a request for permission to present the appeal before the appropriate forum and further requests that the time spent in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal may be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation.
8. Insofar as the order passed by the Tribunal dated 11-3-2002 is concerned, it not only suffers from want of jurisdiction inasmuch as the Karnataka Wakf Tribunal cannot assume jurisdiction to entertain the appeal preferred under Section 10(1) of the Eviction Act in the guise of exercising jurisdiction under Sections 83 and 85 of the Wakf Act, but also for holding that it is only such, a Tribunal which has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal of this nature and not any other Civil Court or Judge. The provisions of Sections 83 and 85 of the Act are not attracted to the fact situation. The appeal has to be presented under the very statute as provided by law. The method of filing an appeal under Section 10(1) of the Premises Act is fully mentioned under Section 10 and the Rules governing the same. It can only be presented in that manner and before the particular forum. The Tribunal also has no jurisdiction or power to say that it is only the Tribunal which has jurisdiction and not any other Civil Court. The order is obviously a total misunderstanding of the provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1974 as also the provisions of Wakf Act, 1995.
9. In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. The order at Annexure-E is quashed by issuing a writ of certiorari. The first respondent-Tribunal is restrained from entertaining or proceeding with the appeal in question any further, by issue of a writ of prohibition. Rule issued and made absolute.
10. Insofar as the request of the learned Counsel for second respondent to direct the Appellate Authority to exclude the time consumed by the second respondent in prosecuting the appeal before the Wakf Tribunal is concerned, it is a matter which is covered by the statutory provisions. It is open for the second respondent to seek such relief as is available and he is entitled to in law, by satisfactorily explaining the delay in approaching the right forum for preferring the appeal.
11. The petitioner shall not initiate any action for implementation of the order of eviction for a period of two weeks from today.
12. With the said observations, this petition is allowed.