Md. Yasin vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/5926/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Apr-2026

CNR: BRHC010225882026

e-Filing Number

26-02-2026

Filing Number

CWJC/4871/2026

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

CWJC/5926/2026

Registration Date

17-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy

Coram

Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CIVIL WRIT ( 15 )

Sub-Category

WAKF BOARD ( 9300 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Md. Yasin

    Adv. Abhishek,Rajeev Kumar,Rajeev Kumar, ,Rajeev Kumar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

    Adv. ,Md. Helal Ahmad 1123

  2. 2.The Secretary, Minority Welfare Department,

  3. 3.The Collector cum District Magistrate,

  4. 4.The Bihar State Sunni Waqf Board

  5. 5.Saiyad Najeeb Ahmad,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Partha SarthyView PDF

    Case Summary: CWJC/5926/2026 Md. Yasin challenged a 2014 Waqf Tribunal order directing him to vacate his residential house, which was declared Waqf property with another party appointed as Mutawalli. The High Court dismissed the writ petition without deciding merits, finding that under Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management Act 1995, the proper remedy was an appeal to the High Court within 90 days, not a writ petition. The petitioner was permitted to withdraw and file an appropriate appeal application in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    For Admission - Fresh Cases

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWJC/5926/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWJC/5926/2026 Md. Yasin challenged a 2014 Waqf Tribunal order directing him to vacate his residential house, which was declared Waqf property with another party appointed as Mutawalli. The High Court dismissed the writ petition without deciding merits, finding that under Section 83(9) of the Unified Waqf Management Act 1995, the proper remedy was an appeal to the High Court within 90 days, not a writ petition. The petitioner was permitted to withdraw and file an appropriate appeal application in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case