Surrendered of 123 prime properties to Wakf raises many questions

-Vinod Bansal

On last Sunday(March 3, 2014), Government of India declared that "The Cabinet has approved the de-notification of 123 properties in Delhi under the control of the land and development office and DDA and allowing the title to revert to the Delhi Wakf Board!" The matter got notified vide Gazette of India extra oridinary No. 566 & S.O. No. 661(E)immediately after declaration of the General election for the 16^th Lok Sabha but, on the very same day. Most of these properties are situated at Prime Locations, many of them having strategic importance and in high-end areas.

The matter has a history. It was in 1970 that the Delhi Wakf Board (DWB) notified these properties as Wakf unilaterally. The Union of India (UOI), in each case, served a notice upon DWB challenging the notification.

The UOI thereafter, filed suits in all 123 cases, challenging the notification. After completion of pleadings, issues were framed and dates for trial were set up. The case of UOI was that all these properties were acquired by it. The process of acquisition was completed in the year 1911 – 1915. The properties had vested in the government. Later on, some properties were transferred to DDA. But, they never belong to DWB.

At present, about sixty of these 123 properties are owned by the Land and Development Office (L&DO) under the urban development ministry while the rest lies with Delhi Development Authority (DDA). Most properties are in and around Connaught Place, Mathura Road, Lodhi Road, Man Singh Road, Pandara Road, Ashoka Road, Janpath, Parliament House, Karol Bagh, Sadar Bazaar, Darya Ganj and Jangpura. Anybody can easily evaluate their importance, with reference to the prime location they are situated at.

In 1974, the UOI appointed a high-powered Committee under the Chairmanship of Shri SMH Burney to consider the issue of these properties and recommend about them. Shri Burney was also the Chairman of DWB at that time.

It is very easy to understand that what could have been delivered by the committee. Thus, it produced a dishonest report obviously in favor of the Wakf. There were at least two properties, one in the lawns of Vice-President of India and the second was inside the wireless station where the said high-powered Committee was not allowed to enter as per its report. Yet, for both of them, as for 121 others, the Committee found that they were functional Wakfs.

To appease the Muslim vote bank, the UOI accepted the recommendations of the Burney Committee and decided to transfer all these properties to the DWB on lease at Re. 1.00 per annum per acre. This was done vide office order dated 27.03.1984 vide no. J.20011/4/74.1-II, Govt. of India, Ministry of Works and Housing.

 This matter was challenged in the High Court of Delhi by way of Writ Petition (C) 1512 of 1984 by Indraprastha Vishwa Hindu Parishad & Others. A stay was granted. Rule was issued. The High Court repeatedly asked if the UOI had a policy to give back lands to religious committees on lease from whom it was acquired. There was no policy.

Finally on 26.08.2010, Shri Prag P. Tripathi, then an Addl. Solicitor General had to concede and say that the UOI was likely to take a policy decision in the matter in four weeks. But, No decision could be taken till 12.01.2011. 

After a long battle of 27 years by the Hindu community to protect the public property, the writ petition was disposed on 12.01.2011 with the following observations:

 “Let the Union of India re-look in the matter and take a decision within six months from today, till then, the interim order passed by this Court on 01.06.1984 shall remain in force. Need less to say, when we have directed that the Union of India shall have a fresh look in to the matter, it shall keep in view the law in praesenti and the factual position.” All other issues and contentions were left open.

 The UOI could not take decision within 6 months from the order. It sought and was granted further 6 months for the purpose.

 Instead of protecting its own property, on last Sunday just two days before declaring general election for the 16^th Lok Sabha, The Cabinet approved the denotification of 123 properties in Delhi under the control of the land and development office and DDA and allowing the title to revert to the Delhi Wakf Board!

On Tuesday, Shri Ashok Singhal, petron Vishwa Hindu Parishad wrote a letter to the president of Bharat praying for “intervene and restrain the outgoing Government on the eve of the general elections from indulging in such acts of vote-bank appeasement and discrimination against the Hindu society! saying that:

“The GOI cannot arbitrarily denotify and transfer high-end prime properties, many of it at locations of strategic importance, to the Delhi Waqf Board without giving to the Hindu society the Sri Rama Janma Bhumi at Ayodhya, Sri Krishna Janmasthan at Mathura, Sri Kashi Vishwanath Prakatsthal at Varanasi, Indraprastha Durg (5,000+ year old Capital Fort of the Pandavas of Mahabharat fame/Old Fort) near Delhi Zoo, the Vishnu Dhwaj (Qutub Minar) complex comprising of the Lal Kot Fort & Qila-Rai-Pithora of the Rajput kings that housed a complex of twenty-seven ancient Hindu and Jain temples which were destroyed by Jihadists and their material used in the construction of the Quwwat-ul-Islam (Might of Islam?) mosque which pattern of terrorist statement they made everywhere else including at the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem, the holiest site in Judaism, superimposing on it the Al-Aqsa Mosque. They have made similar land-grabbing political statements on over 30,000 places of worship of the Himalayan Tradition all over Bharat-varsh. The GOI has also flouted all legal processes in the matter. It is totally unlawful and unconstitutional”

The last minute decision of the union cabinet, specially called on Sunday and notifying it on the date of declaring General elections, raises many questions i.e.:

1.                  Isn’t it an act, which is unlawful and unconstitutional?

2.                  Whether the Govt. can de-notify and transfer properties to one religious committee, ignoring the other.

3.                  Why does Hindus are being deprived of their right to get a glorious temples at the birth/spiritual place of lord Ram, Krishna, Shiva Etc.

4.                  Isn’t it a violation of model code of conduct as the decision, on the eve of declaring general election by the election commission, is purely intends to woo Muslim vote bank?

In the absence of a national policy in the matter serving the cause of national and cultural interest of the country, the so called pseudo-secular politicians may frequently play with the sentiments of the peoples and safety & security of the hard earned property of public importance. Our judiciary and the Election commission should also impose curbs on these appeasement policies & political malpractices. Lastly, in no way, anybody could be allowed to take such decisions, contrary to the public interest, to meet their hasty intentions.

**The writer may be contacted at 9810949109 or at Vinodbansal01@gmail.com**

  Regards

Vinod Bansal
9810949109