SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that a private trust managing a religious shrine without lawful authority or a legally recognisable claim cannot challenge its takeover by statutory Wakaf authorities. Dismissing petitions filed by Sain Miran Baba Darvesh Ghulam Qadir Trust, Justice Sanjay Parihar held that the Ziarat of Sain Baba Miran Baksh Sahib in Poonch has acquired the legal character of a Wakaf by user through decades of continuous public worship, making its administration by the Jammu and Kashmir Wakaf Board entirely valid.
The background of the case traces back to the revered spiritual personality Sain Baba Miran Baksh Sahib, who passed away in 1984 after devoting his life to human welfare. His disciple, Darvesh Ghulam Qadir Sahib, succeeded him and expanded the shrine complex at Village Kopra Guntrian in Poonch district. Following the death of Darvesh Ghulam Qadir in 1999, private individuals constituted the Sain Miran Baba Trust on March 8, 2000, claiming to act in accordance with his last wishes. The trust assumed control over 62 kanals and 11 marlas of landed property across Tehsil Haveli and Mendhar, including the Quadria Masjid Complex, Jamia Anwar-ul-Uloom, Gundi Masjid Chechian, and local educational facilities.
Dispute erupted when the Jammu and Kashmir Wakaf Council declared the shrine a Wakaf property and directed the local Wakaf Administrator to take charge through a communication dated June 23, 2010. The trust challenged this direction in court, obtaining an interim stay order on August 24, 2011. Subsequently, the Department of Haj and Auqaf issued SRO 77 on January 25, 2019, formally notifying the shrine property as a Wakaf under the Jammu and Kashmir Wakaf Act, 2001. The trust challenged SRO 77 through a second petition, securing another stay on March 29, 2019. The High Court clubbed both petitions, OWP No. 1151/2011 and OWP No. 500/2019, to decide the legal ownership.
Senior Advocate Abhinav Sharma, alongside Advocates Abhirash Sharma and Abhishek Wazir, appeared for the petitioner trust. They argued that the shrine was governed by a valid trust deed executed in 2000 and was protected under Section 23 of the Wakaf Act. They relied heavily on a proclamation dated December 2, 2000 issued by Ghulam Mohammad Jan, the then Chairman of the Tehsil Wakaf Committee, who declared that the shrine was a private body outside Wakaf jurisdiction. Contesting the petitions, Senior Advocate P.N. Raina, alongside Advocates Ayjaz Lone and J.A. Hamal, as well as Advocate Chetna Manhas appearing vice Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli, argued that the shrine was a Wakaf by user visited by thousands of devotees offering donations worth crores of Rs annually. They pointed out that neither spiritual leader had executed a trust deed during their lifetimes and that Jan was himself a trustee, creating an obvious conflict of interest.
In its detailed judgment, the court held that neither Sain Baba Miran Baksh nor Darvesh Ghulam Qadir created any trust or executed any deed dedicating the shrine during their lifetimes. Justice Parihar observed that decades of continuous public reverence turned the site into a Wakaf by user under Section 3 of the Jammu and Kashmir Wakaf Act, 2001. Rejecting the 2000 proclamation, the court stated: “Section 34 of the Act merely confers upon the Chairman powers relating to investigation into the nature and extent of Wakaf, inspection, supervision, maintenance and allied administrative functions. The provision does not confer any adjudicatory power upon the Chairman to determine the legal character of a property as being, or not being, a Wakaf property”. The bench emphasized that adjudicatory powers belong exclusively to the Tehsil Wakaf Committee under Section 38.
Dismissing procedural objections regarding the absence of a preliminary survey, the court noted: “Even assuming that there was some delay on the part of the respondents in assuming management of the Wakaf property, such delay cannot enure to the benefit of the petitioner nor confer upon it any legal right to continue in management”.
In the final order pronounced on July 31, 2026, following arguments reserved on July 23, 2026, the court dismissed both writ petitions and vacated all interim stay orders operating since 2011 and 2019. Justice Parihar concluded: “The petitioner-trust, having entered into the management of the shrine without any lawful authority or legally recognizable claim, cannot be permitted to assail the action of the respondents in taking over the management in accordance with the statutory mandate”.
