#DelhiHighCourt to hear #PIL challenging the validity of provisions of #WaqfAct1995 regarding the management of waqf properties. As there are no similar laws for followers of other religions, PIL states that it is against secularism, unity and integrity of the nation
Adv Kirtiman Singh (Respondent): Transfer petition has been filed and it is pending in the Supreme Court.
I have also filed my application seeking time to file a reply.
I have also filed my application seeking time to file a reply.
Court to Adv Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay: Sir your petition is pending in the Supreme Court?
Adv. Upadhyay: The problem is that we knew only about the 2 petitions that were filed in Indore and Allahabad. But in the reply, it is mentioned that 120 PILs have been filed.
Adv. Upadhyay: The problem is that we knew only about the 2 petitions that were filed in Indore and Allahabad. But in the reply, it is mentioned that 120 PILs have been filed.
*The same has been mentioned in Para 5 of the Centre's response*
Adv Upadhyay: If the Centre knows that 120 PILs have been filed, then the Centre should move the Transfer Petition.
Court: If there are 120 petitions in India, then you (Respondents) should file an application
Adv Upadhyay: If the Centre knows that 120 PILs have been filed, then the Centre should move the Transfer Petition.
Court: If there are 120 petitions in India, then you (Respondents) should file an application
Court: Kirtiman Ji agrees
Adv. Upadhyay: My lords, this is a very important matter and it has become a tool for grabbing lands. All the public parks, gaushala, forest etc. are being taken by using this act.
Adv. Upadhyay: My lords, this is a very important matter and it has become a tool for grabbing lands. All the public parks, gaushala, forest etc. are being taken by using this act.
Court: It has been informed that large number of petitions have been filed all over the country..
Adv Upadhyay: Please quote those paragraphs of the Centre's response.
Court: Counsel for respondent has informed this court that transfer petition is pending before Supreme Court
Adv Upadhyay: Please quote those paragraphs of the Centre's response.
Court: Counsel for respondent has informed this court that transfer petition is pending before Supreme Court
Court: Counsel for Union of India prays for deferment of hearing. The application filed by the Centre reveals that as many as 120 PILs are pending before various courts challenging provisions of the Waqf Act, 1995.
Court: Counsel for Centre shall look into the matter to consolidate and transfer all such cases, take appropriate steps.
Matter listed after 8 weeks
Adv Kirtiman: In the last order, this court directed petitioner to include Delhi Waqf Board also
Matter listed after 8 weeks
Adv Kirtiman: In the last order, this court directed petitioner to include Delhi Waqf Board also
Court: An amended Memo of Parties has to be filed
Adv. Upadhyay: I will file it.
Court: Sh. Upadhyay was fair enough in stating before this court that he will file an amended Memo of Parties. Granted 4 weeks time to do the same.
Adv. Upadhyay: I will file it.
Court: Sh. Upadhyay was fair enough in stating before this court that he will file an amended Memo of Parties. Granted 4 weeks time to do the same.
Adv. Upadhyay: This is a Central Act, therefore, I have impleaded the Central Waqf Council..Delhi Waqf has no business in this. If they want to implead, they can do it themselves.
Adv. Kirtiman: We can surely file an application but it is absolutely misconceived that the Delhi Waqf Board has got nothing to do with this..
Court: All Waqf Boards are necessary parties and all of them will have to be heard
Court: All Waqf Boards are necessary parties and all of them will have to be heard
Court to court master: Kindly cut the last line. Counsel for the Delhi Waqf Board prays for time filing appropriate applications and is granted 2 weeks time.
Matter listed on 26th July
Matter listed on 26th July
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
