New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday held a Muslim member of a state bar council ceases to be eligible to serve in the state Waqf Board if he is no longer holding the position in the bar body.
A bench comprising Justices M M Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal was dealing with the question whether a person who ceases to be a Muslim member of a bar council could continue to remain a member of waqf board.
Setting aside the judgement of a division bench of the Manipur High Court, the top court said, “There are twin conditions to be eligible to be a Member of the Board: (1) The candidate must be from the Muslim community; and (2) must hold an active position as a Member of Parliament, State Legislative Assembly, or Bar Council. If a person no longer fulfills these conditions, they cannot continue to hold the Board position (sic).”
The case related to an appeal of one Md Firoz Ahmad Khalid, who was appointed a member of the Manipur Waqf Board in February 2023 following his election to the Manipur bar council.
He replaced another person, who lost his position in the bar council after elections in December 2022.
While a single judge of the high court upheld Khalid’s appointment, the division bench reversed the decision, ruling the law did not explicitly require a bar council member to vacate their position on the Waqf Board upon ceasing to be a bar council member.
Writing a 25-page judgement, Justice Sundresh disagreed with the impugned verdict of the division bench.
The judgment clarified that an ex-member of the bar council can be considered for Waqf Board membership only if there are no serving Muslim members in the bar council at present — a special exception under the second proviso to Section 14(2) of the Waqf Act.
As a result, the bench reinstated the single judge’s decision, upholding Khalid’s appointment as member of the state Waqf Board.
“We also note that presently, the appellant is the only Muslim member in the bar council concerned – a fact that has been rightly taken note of by the state of Manipur, while appointing him as a member of the board. In any case, there is no dispute with respect to the appellant’s eligibility to be a member of the board by virtue of his membership in the bar council,” it said.
