Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

On 16th February, 1911, cadastral survey was finally published and name of Chamru Lal Bhagat, ancestor of appellants was entered in the khatiyan as Shebait. In the year 1933, Chamaru Lal Bhagat died and his sons became Shebait and in the year 1947 Lal Babu Mali and Bangali Mali became Shebait of the Temple.

Temple in question is private temple and has never been vested in Religious Trust Board and all the time, Shebaitship was inherited by the heirs of late Chamru Lal Bhagat, however, Temple was opened for public in 1947 when chicken pox spread and patients were treated by appellants' family by applying water of the well and leaf of Neam tree standing in the compound.

Patna High Court MA No.472 of 2014 dt.23-06-2020 It was stated by the appellants in their application that two full brother Lal Babu Pujari and Bengali Pujari, sons of late Ram Kishun Mali are Shebaits of Shri Sheetla Mata Mandir and as such are persons interested in the management and affair of temple and are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 32 (3) of the said Act.

Lal Babu Pujari filed miscellaneous case No.12/2007 whereas another brother Bengali Pujari filed Miscellaneous Case No.86/2012 under Section 32 (3) of the Act challenging the aforesaid notification issued by the Administrator -cum- OSD of Religious Trust Board before the District Judge, Patna against the same order.

As far as second issue is concerned, whether Shri Sheetla Mata Mandir, Agamkuan, Patna is private temple or public temple, it is gathered from the materials available on record that Shri Sheetla Mata Mandir, Agamkuan, Patna is situated over C.S. Plot No.534 which is recorded in cadastral survey khatiyan as gairmajarua aam land which indicates nature of temple to be a public temple.

In C.S. Khatiyan landlord with respect to plot in question was Syed Md. Mehndi Hasan and nature of the land as gairmajarua aam and remark column shows as Sheetla Asthan Shebait Chamru Lal Bhagat. Accordingly, ancestors of appellants were neither title holder nor founder of the temple but they can claim right to hold the office of shebaitship and for which several litigations were fought among rival contenders Patna High Court MA No.472 of 2014 dt.23-06-2020 claiming themselves to be Shebaits of Temple. However, in such litigations, whether temple is a private temple or a public temple was neither an issue nor decided by the civil court in said civil (Title) suit.

Temple has been declared monument under Asian Monument Preservation Act, 1904.

Appellants being trustees of the temple have been submitting return of income and expenditure as such trustees have accepted the superintendent of the Religious Trust Board. Appellants are registered with the Board having registration No. 3677.

In title suit No.303 of 1976 in which Bihar Religious Trust Board was also a party and where there was dispute with respect to office of shebaitship between two rival contenders, appellants produced receipt granted by Religious Trust Board and produced payment of fees to the Religious Trust Board and copy of return submitted by them to the Board in support of their claim to be Shebait, as such, they are estopped assailing the nature and character of the temple to be other than public temple.