Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth ... vs Jain Shwetamber Society on 18 August, 2025

[Cites 15, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth ... vs Jain Shwetamber Society on 18 August, 2025

1. The instant appeal is under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent directed against the order dated 07.02.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.5523 of 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby and whereunder the learned writ court has quashed and set aside the order dated 17.07.2014 passed by Respondent No.2 in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and remanded the matter to the Respondent 1 2025:JHHC:24695-DB No.2 to reopen the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and to pass an order under Section 10 of the Indian Treasure Trove Act, 1878 expeditiously in accordance with law and accordingly disposed of the writ petition. Factual Matrix

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition, which are required to be enumerated, read hereunder as :-

On 01.06.2000, in course of excavation for new construction in the land adjacent to the main temple in the Temple Campus (Jain Shwetamber Kothi) of the petitioner, 19 consecrated worshipable Idols of Jain Tirthankar were unearthed.

3. An information about the recovery of the said idols was given to the Police Outpost at Madhuban as well as to the Office of the Collector by the petitioner on the same day, i.e. 01.06.2000. Incharge of the Police Outpost prepared an Inventory of the Idols.

4. On 02.06.2000, on the orders of the Respondent Collector, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Giridih along with Deputy Superintendent of Police, Giridih visited the campus of the petitioner and on the orders of the Collector sealed the unearthed 19 idols in a room of the Dharmshala and asked President of the petitioner Trust to execute a security (Jimmanama) in terms of section 4 of the Indian 2 2025:JHHC:24695-DB Treasure Trove Act, 1878 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act, 1878). As per the direction of the Officers, the President and Secretary of the Society executed security.

5. The Respondent Collector vide letter No. 1550 dated 07.06.2000, requested Director Archeology, Bihar, Patna to inspect the recovered idols as well as the excavation site and submit its report so as to take decision with respect to ownership of the said idols.

6. On 02.07.2000, Director, Archeology along with other Officers of the Department in presence of representatives of Shwetambers and Digambers, including Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain carried on Tirthkhsetriya Committee inspected the idol and archeological clearance work at site.

7. The Director, Archeology vide memo no. 268 dated 11.07.2000 submitted its report to the Respondent, Collector, inter alia stating therein that all the 19 recovered idols were buried in the soil by digging a pit about 200-250 years back perhaps due to fear of the then "Mughal invaders".

8. The respondent No.3 Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirthkhetra Committee on 15.07.2000 filed a petition under section 7 read with Section 4 of the Act, 1878 before the Respondent No.2, the Collector, for inter alia declaring idols as Digamber Jain Idol and delivery of same to Digambers. 3

2025:JHHC:24695-DB The said petition was numbered as Misc. Case No. 25/2000.

9. The Director, Archeology, prepared another report, dated 18.07.2000, inter-alia stating therein that similar Idols have been worshiped in the temples of both Shwetambers and Digambers sects. It was further suggested that the idols could be handed over to Digamber sect.

10. The respondent No.2, without determining value of the Idols obviously and rightly because Idols are worshipable, ex-commercium, issued a general notice on 27.07.2000 under Section 5 of the Act, 1878 in Misc. Case no. 25/2000, a copy of which was also served to the petitioner.

11. Thereafter, the petitioner on 11.01.2001, filed its objection, inter alia stating therein that proceedings under the Act of 1878 are not maintainable and prayed for rejection of the petition filed by the respondent No.3 on the ground the (a) idols are worshipable hence valueless and as such not treasure under Sec. 3 of the Act, (b) mandatory requirements of the Act has not been followed, (c) idols having similar inscription and character are installed and worshiped in temple since centuries, (d) Digambers have no locus in present proceeding.

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

12. The respondent No.3 filed another petition before the respondent No.2 on 15.03.2001 with a prayer to keep the recovered idols in safe custody pending adjudication of the matter whereupon the respondent No.2 vide order dated 19.11.2002 directed the Circle Officer, Pirtand to take the said idols in custody in presence of both the parties by keeping them in a properly sealed wooden box and thereafter to deposit the same in the District Treasury.

13. The Petitioner challenged the said order before the Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh under Sec. 76 of the Practice & Procedure Manual, 1958 by filing Misc. Revision (R) 126/2002 on 16.12.2002 and the learned Commissioner after hearing the parties vide order dated 25.01.2003 set aside the entire proceedings of Misc. Case No. 25 of 2000 pending before the respondent No.2 holding that the same got vitiated due to non-compliance of mandatory provision of publishing a general notification in terms with Section 5 of the Act, 1878 before passing the order for interim protection of the said idols.

14. The said order of the Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh was challenged by the respondent no. 3 by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 on 17.02.2003.

15. Learned Single Judge stayed the order dated 25.01.2003 passed by the Commissioner, North 5 2025:JHHC:24695-DB Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh during pendency of the said writ petition. In the meantime, the petitioner and the Secretary of one of the subsects of Digamber Society i.e. the respondent no. 4, entered into an agreement on 16.02.2003 and in terms of said agreement, 9 idols were installed in the temple of Shwetamber Society i.e. the petitioner and 9 idols were installed in the temple of the respondent no. 4 in presence of Jain Acharya Shri Sushil Surishwarji, whereas one idol which was in broken condition was lying in the temple premises of the petitioner. Thereafter, the Shwetamber Society filed I.A No. 543 of 2003 for vacating the stay granted by learned Single Judge, however, the said interlocutory application was dismissed by learned Single Judge on 08.04.2003 and subsequently, vide order dated 14.08.2003, the writ petition was referred to learned Division Bench after noticing the argument of learned Advocate General, State of Jharkhand that the land had vested in the State and, therefore, the said treasure belonged to the State of Jharkhand.

16. The Jain Shwetamber Society through its Manager also filed a writ petition on 18.09.2003 being W.P.(C) No. 4820 of 2003 for quashing the entire proceeding of Misc. Case No. 25 of 2000 including the order dated 19.08.2003 passed by the respondent no. 2 and the said writ petition was also referred to learned Division Bench for being heard 6 2025:JHHC:24695-DB along with W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003. Thus, W.P.(C) No. 4820 of 2003 was tagged with W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003.

17. Finally, learned Division Bench, vide order dated 14.05.2004 passed in "Bharat Varshiya Digambar Jain Tirth Kshetriya Committee" allowed W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003 and quashed the order dated 25.01.2003 passed by the Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh by restoring the order dated 19.11.2001 passed by the respondent no. 2.

18. The Respondent Collector, in terms of direction of this Hon'ble Court, issued general notice dated 20.07.2004 under the Act of 1878, which was published in the district gazette as well as in the newspaper and in compliance of said notice six persons including petitioner filed their respective claim but the respondent Digamber Committee had not filed any claim, hence its claim, if any stands forfeited under Sec. 6 of the Act of 1878.

19. The respondent no. 2 vide order dated 21.09.2004, decided to proceed for determining the dispute in terms of Section 7 of the Act of 1878.

20. The Collector, Giridih by order dated 29.12.2009 after hearing the parties, inter-alia declared u/s 9 of the Treasure Trove Act, declare the treasure- discovered, nineteen idols, the subject matter of present dispute to be ownerless.

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

21. The order of the Collector declaring Idols Ownerless was not challenged by filing an appeal as provided under Sec.9 of the Act, to the best of Petitioner's knowledge, hence the order attained finality.

22. It is worth to state here that after order dated 29.12.2009 the case was adjourned on several dates before the impugned order dated 17.07.2014 was passed and on all most all the dates Petitioner was represented through his Advocate, but hearing could not take place in the matter for one reason or other and unfortunately Advocate of the petitioner failed to appear on 17.07.2014 and the impugned order was passed.

23. During the pendency of the case, the Respondent Collector vide letter no. 1393 dated 26.10.2010 requested the Secretary, Department of Art, Culture, Sport and Youth, Jharkhand, in reference to the judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated 14.05.2004, inter-alia to investigate and report on following points:

(i) Whether Idols are covered under the provisions of the Ancient Monument's Preservation Act, 1904?

(ii) Whether Idols are covered under the provisions of the Act of 1958 and Bihar Act of 1976?

(iii) Whether it is necessary under the provisions of said Acts to deliver Idols for conservation and use to the Competent Authority?

8

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

24. The Director, Directors of Art, Culture, Sport and Youth, Jharkhand, Ranchi vide his letter No. 212 dated 11.03.2014 replied the said queries as under:

(i) The Act stands repealed.

(ii) Both Acts are applicable on Idols. Sec. 25 and 26 of the Act 4 of 1958 and Sec. 32, 34, 24 and 25 of the Bihar Act. 1976 are applicable.

(iii) Under-the said Acts, the Idols are required to be handed over to the Authorized/Competent Officer of the State Government for ownership, conservation and use.

25. The respondent Collector vide order dated 17.07.2014 inter alia disposed of the proceedings of Case No. 25 of 2000 under the Act of 1878 on the basis of the said report of the Director, without application of mind by a non-speaking order.

26. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 5523 of 2014.

27. After hearing the parties, learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition by quashing and setting aside the order dated 17.07.2014 passed in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and remanded the matter with a direction to reopen the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and to pass an 9 2025:JHHC:24695-DB order under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 expeditiously in accordance with law.

28. The aforesaid order has been challenged by filing the instant Letters Patent Appeal.

29. It is evident from the factual aspect that a dispute arose in between the two Sects, i.e., Digambar, represented by the appellant herein and the Shwetamber, the respondent herein, with respect to the 19 idols found on 1st June, 2000 at Village Maduban, Pirtand, which had been kept in Jain Shwetamber Kothi and having possession over the same.

30. The proceeding has been initiated for having the custodial right of the said idols by way of institution of a case being Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 in the court of District Collector, Giridih.

31. An order was passed on 19.11.2002, wherein the Collector has passed order, taking into consideration the factum of the dispute of claim of parties, which is to be decided after their respective evidence and the same since will take time, therefore, it is for the benefit of both the parties that idols would be kept under government custody till the dispute between the parties is finally decided.

32. The Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand has also been directed to take in custody all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and to keep in wooden box properly sealed and 10 2025:JHHC:24695-DB signed in presence of representative of both the parties. The parties, if so like, may put their respective seal on the box.

33. The Anchal Adhikari shall keep the sealed box in district treasury till the dispute between the parties finally decided.

34. The said order has been challenged by filing a revision before the Commissioner, North Chota Nagapur Division, Ranchi being Miscellaneous Revision (R)-126 of 2002, filed under Section 76 of the Practice and Procedure Manual.

35. The Revisional Authority had decided the issue by passing final order on 25.01.2003 by quashing the entire proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000.

36. The matter finally traveled to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 and W.P.(S) No.4820 of 2003.

37. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed judgment on 14.5.2004. The deliberation has been made on the issue on fact and law and has issued the following directions, as would be evident from paragraph 17 of the said judgment whereby and whereunder the order passed by the Commissioner dated 25.01.2003 has been quashed by allowing the writ petition being W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003. 11

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

38. Further, the order dated 09.11.2001 passed by Collector in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 had been restored with the following directions:-

(i) We direct the concerned authorities to consider whether the statuettes recovered are not objects of archaeological, historical or artistic interest under the concerned Acts referred to by us in the earlier part of this judgment.

(ii) We direct the Collector to get his order dated 19.11.2001 strictly implemented by the Circle Officer and Anchal Adhikari.

(iii) We direct the Collector to proceed in accordance with the Act after fulfilling the requirements of the Act and to take a decision as contemplated by the Act.

(iv) We direct the Collector and the other superior officers of the Circle Officer concerned to look into his conduct in not obeying the order of the Collector dated 19.11.2001 and making an appropriate enquiry into his conduct from all angles.

(v) We direct the Collector to expedite the proceedings and after hearing all concerned, pass a final order as contemplated by the Act.

39. The Collector, Giridih, in terms of the said order, has passed an order on 17.07.2014, whereby the 12 2025:JHHC:24695-DB proceeding initiated under the Act, 1878 has been closed on the basis of the report dated 11.03.2014 sent by the Director, Directorate of Art, Culture, Sports, and Youth Affairs, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

40. The said order dated 17.07.2014 has been challenged by the respondent herein, namely, Jain Shwetambar Society.

41. The learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 07.02.2024 passed in W.P.(C) NO. 5523 of 2014 has disposed of the writ petition by quashing the order dated 17.07.2014 passed by the Collector, Giridih, Respondent No.2, in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 remanding the matter with a direction to reopen the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and to pass an order under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 expeditiously in accordance with law.

42. The said direction has been passed, based upont he reason, as would be evident from paragraph 42 of the said judgment wherein it has been referred that the crux of the direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court rendered in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003 was of the adjudication of the issue/dispute for all times to come but in course of pendency of the said dispute, 19 idols have been directed to be kept in the safe custody of the District Treasury to be acted upon by the Anchal Adhikari of the concerned Anchal. 13

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

43. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has come to the conclusive finding that when the dispute pertaining to the custodial right of the 19 idols has been directed to be decided by the Adjudicator in terms of Section 10 of the Act, 1878, but closing the proceeding in the midway, based upon a report, cannot be said to be the justified decision of the Collector, both as per the power conferred to the Collector under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 and the direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court and, therefore, the order of remand was passed by reopening the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000.

44. The said order is under challenge.

Submission made on behalf of the appellant

45. The ground has been taken by Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the report since has been submitted by the concerned authority and based upon the same, if any order has been passed closing the proceeding the Collector vide order dated 17.07.2014, the same cannot be said to be unjust and improper but the learned Single Judge, without taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter has quashed the order dated 17.07.2014 by reopening the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000, which cannot be said to be justified and it is not justified.

2025:JHHC:24695-DB Submission made on behalf of Respondent No.1

46. Per contra, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pasari, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1, has submitted that the learned Single Judge vide judgment impugned has not passed the fresh direction, rather, it is the reiteration of the direction already passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 14.05.2004 in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003 wherein the order has been passed to adjudicate the issue pertaining to the custodial right of 19 idols. Therefore, what is being contended on behalf of the appellant that the order passed by the learned Single Judge suffers from an error is not having any foundation, rather, the learned Single Judge has only remanded the matter to the authority to come to the conclusion by adjudicating the custodial right as per the observation and direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court wherein the mandate of Section 10 of the Act,1878 has been taken into consideration. Submission made on behalf of the State

47. Learned counsel appearing for the State, being a formal party, has submitted that he has nothing to say so far as the issue on merit is concerned. However, it has been submitted that the matter is now pending before the Collector and he being the quasi-judicial functionary, no direction can be passed by the State Government to 15 2025:JHHC:24695-DB expedite the hearing, rather, the direction is already there in the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court. Analysis

48. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment.

49. The ground upon which the present appeal has been preferred is particularly the direction passed by the learned Single Judge for reopening the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 which has been initiated to decide the custodial right of the 19 idols.

50. The learned Single Judge has passed the order to that effect so that the conclusion be arrived at after taking evidence on behalf of the parties regarding the custodial right of the said idols, as per the direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003.

51. There cannot be any dispute and nobody can dispute it that if a dispute has been raised on behalf of the parties before the Adjudicator on conferment of power under the statute, it is the bounden duty of such Adjudicator, whether it is quasi-judicial functionary or it is the judicial functionary, to adjudicate the issue by coming to the logical end.

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

52. It is not expected from such Adjudicator to not come to the logical end and rescind the proceeding only on the basis of a report or the version of the parties, rather, the propriety demands that if any report has been produced or any plea has been taken on behalf of the parties, then there must be the considered finding to be recorded by the concerned Adjudicator, meaning thereby, the finding must be based upon active application of mind and not being suede by any report or any version of the party concerned, rather, the evidence or the version or the pleading requires consideration by active application of mind, to be applied by the Adjudicator.

53. We have gone through the order dated 19.11.2002 which has been passed by way of ad-interim measure to get 19 idols in custody till the dispute between the parties is finally decided, meaning thereby, the dispute pertaining to custody of said idols requires consideration and in that view of the matter, in the Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 which has been initiated for the purpose of adjudicating the custodial right in between the parties by way of ad-interim measure by passing an order dated 19.11.2002 the custody of the 19 idols has been taken into consideration with a direction to the Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand to take in custody all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and keep them in a properly sealed wooden box and thereafter to 17 2025:JHHC:24695-DB deposit the same in the District Treasury till the dispute is finally decided. The relevant part of the said order is being referred hereunder as :-

"Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand is directed to take in custody all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and to keep in wood box properly sealed and signed in presence of representative of both the parties. Parties may if so like may put their respective seal over the box. The Anchal Adhikari shall keep sealed box in Dist. Treasury till the dispute between the parties is finally decided."

54. The said order has travelled to appeal and revision. The revisional authority has quashed the order dated 19.11.2002 and thereby the matter came to this Court and heard by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003.

55. The Division Bench has passed the order and as would be evident from paragraph 17 thereof, the following directions have been passed :-

"17. In the result, we allow WP (C) No.916 of 2003 and quash the order of the Commissioner dated 25.1.2003 and restore the order of the Collector dated 19.11.2001. We direct the concerned authorities to consider whether the statuettes recovered are not objects of archaeological, historical or artistic interest under the concerned Acts referred to by us in the earlier part of this judgment. We direct the Collector to get his order dated 19.11.2001 strictly implemented by the Circle Officer and Anchal Adhikari. We direct the Collector to proceed in accordance with the Act after fulfilling the requirements of the Act and to take a decision as contemplated by the Act. We direct the Collector and the other superior officers of the Circle Officer concerned to look into his conduct in not obeying the order of the Collector dated 19.11.2001 and making an 18 2025:JHHC:24695-DB appropriate enquiry into his conduct from all angles. We direct the Collector to expedite the proceedings and after hearing all concerned, pass a final order as contemplated by the Act. We dismiss Writ Petition (S) No.4820 of 2003."

56. The Collector, Giridih, based upon a report, has closed the proceeding vide order dated 17.07.2014.

57. We have gone through the said order and found therefrom that the Collector has given a finding that at present all the idols are lying with the District Treasury and, as such, the proceeding be closed.

58. We are very much surprised that this was not the mandate of the order of the Division Bench of this Court and power conferred under Section 10 of the Act, 1878, rather, the Collector has been conferred with the power under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 as also under the mandate to adjudicate the issue regarding the right of the parties for which the Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 has begun and as ad-interim measure the Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand was directed to take in custody all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and to keep in wood box properly sealed and signed in presence of representative of both the parties and to keep the sealed box in District Treasury till the dispute between the parties is finally decided.

59. The said order has been restored by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 14.05.2004 by issuing direction upon the concerned authority to consider 19 2025:JHHC:24695-DB whether the statuettes recovered are not objects of archaeological, historical or artistic interest under the concerned Acts.

60. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the Collector was duty bound to adjudicate the custodial right of the parties.

61. The order passed by the revisional authority when has been questioned by the respondent herein, then the learned Single Judge has considered the approach of the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih to be not just and proper in not adjudicating the issue and, therefore, the order dated 17.07.2014 quashing the proceeding in connection with Misc. Case No.25 of 2000, has been quashed and set aside by restoring the said proceeding in order to decide the said issue by passing an order under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 expeditiously, in accordance with law.

62. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has taken into consideration the issue of adjudication of the custodial right of the 19 idols, subject matter of the lis, and, as such, while doing so if the proceeding of the Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 which has been closed vide order dated 17.07.2014, if has been reopened by order of remand, which according to our considered view, cannot be said to suffer from an error, reason being that if any interference will be there in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge then the 20 2025:JHHC:24695-DB question would be that how the custodial right of the party would be considered and decided.

63. The mandate of Section 10 of the Act, 1878 and the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court is to decide the issue by giving a specific finding on the custodial right with respect to 19 idols, the lis in question, which has not been taken into consideration, rather, on the basis of a report in which the custody of the idols has been shown to be there in the District Treasury, entire proceeding has been closed.

64. It has been submitted, at Bar, on behalf of the parties, that the proceeding before the Collector in connection with Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 (now renumbered as Misc. Case No.25 of 2025) is at advance stage. It has also been informed that both the parties are contesting therein.

65. In that view of the matter also, we are of the view that no interference is to be shown in the impugned judgment.

66. Accordingly, the instant appeal fails and is dismissed.

67. At this juncture, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has submitted that the talks of compromise is going on.

2025:JHHC:24695-DB

68. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pasari, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1, has submitted that he is having no positive instruction on the issue of compromise.

69. Be that as it may, if the parties have entered into any compromise, the parties are at liberty to place it before the Adjudicator for its consideration.

70. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.

71. Pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) A.F.R. Birendra/ 22

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court