The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea to quash the appointment of the Delhi Waqf Board administrator, imposing costs on the petitioner. The court found the challenge baseless and upheld the administrator’s appointment.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition with costs of Rs.10,000, which sought to have the appointment of Ashwani Kumar as the administrator of the Delhi Waqf Board overturned. The petition filed in response to the demolition of the Akhoondji mosque earlier this year.
Justice Subramonium Prasad characterized Yamin Ali’s petition as being driven by publicity and an abuse of legal procedures. He noted that the petition lacked substantial grounds for challenging the appointment of the city government officer as the administrator of the board.
The judge in a ruling dated May 24, stated,
“The court declines to entertain the current writ petition and is inclined towards its dismissal, with the petitioner directed to bear costs amounting to Rs. 10,000/-to be remitted to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks from the date of this order,”
The Court remarked,
“The court finds no grounds to annul the appointment of Respondent No.2. It is evident that Respondent No.2 possesses the requisite qualifications for the Administrator position. This Writ Petition is merely an abuse of legal process and appears to be aimed at garnering publicity,”
A Mehrauli resident filed a petition, claiming his mother’s grave was located in the graveyard adjacent to an ancient mosque. He asserted the mosque belonged to the Delhi Waqf Board, and accused the administrator of failing to protect it from demolition.
The petitioner contended,
“The ‘Akhoondji mosque,’ believed to be over 600 years old, and the associated Behrul Uloom madrasa, were declared illegal structures in Sanjay Van and subsequently demolished by the DDA on January 30.”
In its order, the court stated that the petitioner merely claimed the administrator’s actions were “bad,” without providing any reason why the administrator lacked the qualifications for the role. The court also noted the petitioner attempted to give a communal tone to the proceedings.
The court observed that the petitioner had previously filed a petition on the same matter, and after withdrawing it, they submitted the ‘identical writ petition with the same allegations’ once again.
The court stated that,
“It is always open for the Petitioner to approach the Waqf Board for challenging the actions of the Administrator or file a petition challenging specific actions in this regard which has been done in several other petitions pending before this court.”
It concluded,
“The petition, along with any pending applications, is hereby dismissed,”
Read Also: Delhi Waqf Board Case | Delhi HC Seeks ED’s Response to Daud Nasir’s Interim Bail Plea
The court’s decision comes after thorough scrutiny of the allegations and legal arguments presented against the appointment process.
The imposition of costs by the court is a reminder of the legal responsibilities that petitioners hold when challenging administrative appointments, discouraging frivolous litigations that can burden the judicial system. This outcome not only clarifies the legal standing of the current administrator’s position but also sets a precedent for how similar cases might be handled in the future, thus contributing to the stability and integrity of administrative governance in such institutions.