BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR. v. VISHWANA TH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS.
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court
- Hon'ble Judges
- Justice I. S. Sinha
- Justice Harjit Singh Bedi
- Judgment Date
- 2007-09-14
- Court Decision / Holding
- The appeals are dismissed; however, the Court directs that the status quo as it exists today will continue until disposal of the matters. A fresh show-cause notice under Section 29(2) will be issued to the committee, and both parties may produce documents before the Board within four months from service of the notice. The status quo will continue to operate till the final disposal of the matter by the Board in proceedings under Section 29(2).
- Final Disposition
- Appeals disposed of.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts & Anr.
Respondents
- Vishwanath Prasad Lohia and Others
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • K.B. Rohtagi
- • Aparna Rohtagi
- • S.K. Dhingra
Counsels for Respondents
- • H.L. Agrawal
- • Irshad Ahmad
- • Laksmi Raman Singh
Case Synopsis & Summary
This Supreme Court judgment concerns the validity of a notification under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950, which sought to supersede a committee constituted on the basis of the trust deed dated 26 September 1983. The Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts appealed against a Patna High Court quashment of the 5 August 1989 notification, which had been challenged on the ground that it was not in terms of Section 29(2) and that the scheme under Section 32 was not in accordance with law. A civil suit (Civil Suit No. 207/1986) challenging the validity of the trust was pending. The Court held that the notice proposing supersession is a composite instrument under Sections 29(2) and 32, and that the High Court’s conclusion that there was no evidence that notices under Section 29(2) were served could not be seriously challenged. Since the civil suit remains pending, the Court directed that the existing status quo would continue until disposal of the matter; and that a fresh show-cause notice under Section 29(2) be issued, with both parties allowed to produce documents before the Board within four months. Ultimately, the appeals were dismissed but with directions to preserve status quo until final disposal by the Board in proceedings under Section 29(2).
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The appellants contended that the requisite notice under sub-section (2) of Section 29 had been issued to the committee prior to its supersession and that the High Court’s quashing of the notification was not correct. They argued that the notice to supersede forms a composite mechanism under Sections 29(2) and 32 and that due process and hearing were addressed in the overall framework, with civil proceedings pending affecting the validity of the trust.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents argued that the scheme under Section 32 was not in accordance with law, that the notification under Section 29(2) was not properly issued, and that due process had not been satisfied; they pointed to the ongoing Civil Suit challenging the trust and urged adherence to proper procedural requirements.
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR. v. VISHWANA TH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.