High CourtDivision BenchAppeals disposed of.

BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR. v. VISHWANA TH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Appeal No. 5880 of 2000; C.A. No. 5879 of 2000
Neutral Citation:[2007] 9 S.C.R. 956

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

Section 29(2) of the Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950Section 32 of the Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950

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

Beta

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.

{ ## A # THE BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR. _v._ ## VISHWANA TH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS. ## SEPTEMBER 14, 2007 ## B ## IS.B.SINHAANDHARJITSINGHBEDI,JJ.J _Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950-Section 29(2)Notification under-Issuance of-Quashed b)l High Court holding that_ C _Notification not in terms of s 29(2) and civil suit involving same question pending trial-On appeal, held: Finding of High Court correct that there was no evidence to show that the notices had been served under s. 29(2)Civil suit with regard to similar issue pending in Civil Court, Thus, appeals dismissed but status-quo as existing to continue till final disposal of pending matter._ ## D Notification was issued under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Bihar ., State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950 whereby the committee was com:tituted on the basis of the trust deed. High Court held that the Notification was not in terms ofsection.29(2); that scheme under section 32 was not in accordance with law; and that the civil suit involving same question was pending trial, E and quashed the Notification. Hence these appeals. ## Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The notice given to the committee proposing supersession is a composite one under section 29(2) and section 32 of the Bihar State Board F Religious Trust Act, 1950. The finding of the High Court that there was no evidence to show that the notices had been served under section 29(2) cannot be seriously challenged. The Civil Suit with regard to the validity of the trust is pending in the Civil Court. It is directed that the _status quo_ as exists today would continue till the disposal of the matters. !Para 31 [956-A, BJ ## G CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5880 of2000. From the Judgment and Order dated 27.09.1991 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in C.W.J.C. No. 3510of1991. 954 H BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS _v._ V.P. LOHIA [H.S. BED!, J.] 955 ,• WITH A C.A. No. 5879 of2000. K.B. Rohtagi, Aparna Rohtagi and S.K. Dhingra for the Appellant. H.L. Agrawal, Irshad Ahmad and Laksmi Raman Singh for the B Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts etc. impugning the judgment of the Division C Bench of the Patna High Court dated 27.9.1991 quashing the Notification dated 5.8.1989 issued under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter called the "Act") whereby the committee said to have been constituted on the basis of the trust deed dated 26.9.1983. D 2. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants herein that the requisite notice under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Act had been issued to the committee prior to its supersession and as such the impugned judgment holding to the contrary was not correct. We however find that the notice given to the committee proposing supersession is a composite E one under section 29(2) and section 32 of the Act. The High Court has found that the said Notification (Annexure-3) dated 5th August 1989 was not in accordance with the provisions or in terms of section 29 of the Act and did not also meet the parameters of the scheme which have been formulated later under section 32. It had also come during the course of the hearing before the High Court that Civil Suit No. 207/1986 seeking a declaration, _inter-alia,_ F that the trust deed dated 26th September 1983 was a void document as well as several other issues was pending trial. The Division Bench opine_d that as the matter was sub-judice before the Civil Court it would not be necessary or appropriate to go into the questions raised before the Civil Court but in so far as the aforesaid Notification was concerned it having been issued under section 29(2) of the Act without giving a proper hearing to the committee G and the scheme under section 32 of the Act being not in accordance with law was liable to be quashed. It is in this situation, the present appeals have been filed by the Board. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through H ## 956 ## SUPREME COURT REPORTS ## [2007] 9 S.C.R. - A the record and in particular the notices allegedly given to the committee before its supersession as also the scheme framed under section 32 of the Act. We note the finding of the High Court that there was no evidence to show that the notices had been served under section ~9(2) cannot be seriously challenged. We also find that Civil Suit with regard to the validity of' the trust - B is pending in the Civil Court. We accordingly dismiss the appeals but while doing so direct that the status quo as exists today will continue till the disposal of the appeals. We also direct that a fresh show cause notice under section 29(2) will be given to the committee and both parties will be at liberty to produce their documents before the Board within four months from the date of the service of the notice and that status-quo as exists today will - C continue to operate till the final disposal of the matter by the Board in proceedings under section 29(2) of the Act. 4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly 5. Civil Appeal No. 5879/2000 is disposed of in tenns of the judgment D in Civil Appeal No. 5880/2000. NJ. Appeals disposed of.