Justice M.M. Sundresh, Justice Rajesh Bindal, Supreme Court
Ex-Member Of Bar Council Can Be Member Of Waqf Board Only If There Is No Serving Muslim Member Or Senior Muslim Advocate: Supreme Court
|The Supreme Court explained that an existing Muslim Member of the Board from the Bar Council, would cease to be a Member of the Board, upon the completion of his tenure as a Member of the Bar Council, when there is another Muslim Member available to replace them from within the Bar Council.
The Supreme Court held that an ex-member of the Bar Council can be a Member of the Waqf Board only if there is no serving Muslim Member in the Bar Council as well as no Senior Muslim Advocate.
The Court held thus in Civil Appeals in which the short issue for consideration was – “Whether a Muslim Member of the Bar Council of the State or the Union territory, duly elected as a Member of the Waqf Board constituted under Section 14 of the Wakf Act, 1995, can continue to hold the said position, even after the expiry of his tenure in the Bar Council?”
The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed, “… an ex-Member of the Bar Council would constitute the electoral college only when there is no eligible Member as provided for in Section 14(1)(b)(iii) of the 1995 Act, and the proviso contained therein. This means that if there is no serving Muslim Member in the Bar Council and also no Senior Muslim advocate who is available, only then would an ex-Member of the Bar Council be eligible to be a Member of the Board.”
The Bench added that an existing Muslim Member of the Board from the Bar Council, would cease to be a Member of the Board, upon the completion of his tenure as a Member of the Bar Council, when there is another Muslim Member available to replace them from within the Bar Council.
Factual Background
A Gazette Notification was issued by the Manipur Bar Council vide which the Appellant was elected as a Member of the Bar Council. Subsequently, an Order was issued by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Minority Affairs), Government of Manipur, appointing the Appellant as one of the Members of the 7th Waqf Board Committee under the Wakf Act, since the Respondent being an earlier Member of the Board had ceased to be a Member of the Manipur Bar Council. The Respondent filed a Writ Petition before the Manipur High Court, praying for quashing of the Order vide which the Appellant was appointed to the Board. The Single Judge dismissed his Petition saying that as per the mandate of Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) of the Wakf Act, he cannot be a Member of the Board, any longer.
Thereafter, the Division Bench concluded that the said Explanation only speaks about instances wherein a Member of the Board ceases to be a Member of Parliament or Member of the State Legislative Assembly, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have vacated their position in the Board. It further concluded that the said Explanation does not apply to a Member of the Board, who ceases to hold their position as a Muslim Member of the concerned Bar Council, and that they would continue to hold their position as a Member of the Board, regardless of them having ceased to be a Muslim Member of the Bar Council. This was challenged before the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court after hearing the arguments from both sides, noted, “To interpret a legislative provision, what must be primarily considered is its substantive part. An explanation simply performs a clarifying function. In other words, the substantive part of a provision cannot be understood solely from the point of view of an explanation.”
The Court said that there is no satisfactory justification to exclude the applicability of Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) of the Wakf Act, to a Member of the Bar Council and such an exclusion would, in fact, run contrary to the legislative intent behind the statute.
“… upon a reading of the entire provision, it is clear that there is no conscious intention on the part of the Legislature to omit the applicability of Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) of the 1995 Act, to Muslim Members of the Board elected from the Bar Council”, it further elucidated.
The Court emphasised that the object of any provision must be seen in light of the provisions surrounding it, which includes the proviso(s) and the explanation(s) appended to it.
“When a right accrues to a person pursuant to a position that they hold, it ultimately becomes a qualification. Once such qualification ceases to exist, that person would not be eligible to hold any other post based on his earlier position, unless the statute categorically facilitates the same”, it added.
The Court observed that an explanation, which is simply in the nature of a clarification as regards certain categories, cannot be read in a manner which is violative of the substantive part of the provision.
“Ultimately, a proviso or an explanation may be used for several purposes. Therefore, what is required is that Courts appreciate the context of such usage before rendering an interpretation to a provision vis-a-vis the proviso or explanation contained therein”, it also remarked.
Moreover, the Court took note of the fact that the Appellant is the only Muslim Member in the concerned Bar Council - 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. … we hold that the decision rendered by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Shri Asif S/o Shaukat Qureshi Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. (Writ Petition No. 4343 of 2016) decided on 22.12.2016, is not a good law”, it held.
Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the Appeals and set aside the impugned Judgment.
Cause Title- Md. Firoz Ahmad Khalid v. The State of Manipur & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 535)
Appearance:
AORs Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Rajkumari Banju, B. Krishna Prasad, Advocates Karun Sharma, Anupama Ngangom, and Rajkumari Divyasana.