Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Sudhakar Malu vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 April, 2012

Bench: Chief Justice, Chakradhari Sharan Singh

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2999 of 2010
                 ======================================================
                 Sudhakar Malu, S/O Late Mohan Chandra Singh Malu, permanent resident
                 of Mirchaigali Patna City, P.S.Chowk, District-Patna-800008, presently
                 resident of Rajajipuram, Lucknow, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.
                                                                        .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 1. The State of Bihar
                 2. Bihar State Hindu Religious Trust Board, Patna through its
                     Adminisrator, Sri Kishore Kunal
                 3. Sri Kishore Kunal, Administrator, Bihar State Hindu Religious Trust
                     Board, Patna
                 4. Sri Vijay Kumar Karva, S/O Sri Gopal Karva, resident of Kadamkuan ,
                     Near Jahaji Kothi, P.O.& P.S.Kadamkuan,District-Patna-800003
                 5. Smt. Shanti Devi, W/O Late Ram Lal Maheshwari,
                 6. Sri Rajesh Kumar Maheshwari S/O Late Ram Lal Maheshwari
                     Both residents of Central Government -119, Saltlake, Sector-2, Kolkata-
                     700091
                 7. Sri Piyush Maheshwari, S/O Late Prem Narayan Maheshwari, resident
                     of 50 HACP Colony, Opposite Vikrampura (Near Sikandarabad Club),
                     Sikandarabad-500009, Andhra Pradesh
                 8. Sri Dinesh Chandra Maheshwari, S/O Late Ram Narayan Maheshwari
                     resident of Sector 4 F-7211, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro-827004,
                     Jharkhand
                                                                       .... .... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. S.S. Dwivedi, Sr. Advocate.
                                                Mr. Ranjan Kr.Dubey
                                                Mr. Rakesh Chandra
                 For the Respondent/s       :   Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, GA-1 with
                                                Mr. Dilip Kumar, A.C. to GA 7
                 For the Respondent Nos. 2-3: Mr. Ganpati Trivedi
                                                Mr. Madan Moha, Advocates.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                       and
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH

                 ORAL ORDER

                 (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

9   18-04-2012

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the order dated 21st October 2009 made by the Bihar State Hindu Religious Trust Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'), has been referred to the Division Bench by the learned single Judge under his order dated 17 th May 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.2999 of 2010 (9) dt.18-04-2012 2/2 2011 on account of challenge to the validity of Clause (u) of Section 28(2) of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

The validity of the said Clause (u) has been up-held by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Nagendra Nath Shukla & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar and Others [2008(2) PLJR 812]. Nevertheless, the learned Advocate Mr. S.S. Dwivedi has submitted that the said decision is erroneous and the matter requires to be referred for consideration by a larger Bench. Mr. Dwivedi has submitted that under the impugned Clause (u) the Board has been conferred unfettered power to decide the issue in respect of a religious Trust whether it is a public or a private Trust.

We see no merit in the contention raised by Mr. Dwivedi. The validity of the aforesaid Clause (u) of Section 28 (2) of the Act having been up-held once, the same cannot be now challenged under one pretext or the other. We are unable to hold that the judgment in the matter of Nagendra Nath Shukla (supra) is erroneous and the question of validity of the said Clause (u) requires re-consideration.

The subject matter of the challenge to the order made by the Board being triable by the learned single Judge, the matter be posted before the learned single Judge for hearing and decision in accordance with law.

(R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Sujit/-