JUDGMENT

MISRA, J.:—The present appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 29th July, 1969 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

2. The dispute in this appeal centres around a religious institution in village Ramgarh (also known as Bhagtuana), tehsil Faridkot, district Bhatinda. This village was previously in the erstwhile Nabha State which merged with Pepsu and after the reorganisation of the States, became a part of the Punjab State in 1956. Sixty-five persons claiming to be members of the Sikh community moved an application before the State Government under S. 7 (1) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as amended by the Amendment Act I of 1959, to have the institution declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara. The State Government notified the said application in the Punjab Gazette in terms of S. 7 (3) of the Act on 18th Oct., 1963. Upon this the appellant made an application under Ss. 8 and 10 of the Act claiming that the institution was not a Sikh Gurdwara but an Udasi institution known as Dera Bhai Bhagtu. This application was referred by the State Government to the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal for adjudication. It was contended by the appellant that throughout its long history the institution has been an Udasi institution. This institution was not established for use by Sikhs for public worship, nor was it founded in the memory of a Sikh Martyr, saint or a historical person. It has never been used for public worship by the Sikhs. The institution was the Dera of Udasi Bhekh and the objects of worship are idols of Gola Sahib and of Baba Srichand, and the various samadhs.

3. The petition was resisted by the respondent Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee on three grounds. (1) that the appellant was not competent to move the petition under S. 7 of the Act because he was not a hereditary office holder, (2) that the provisions of the Act are not ultra vires the Constitution, and (3) that the institution in dispute was a Sikh Gurdwara.

4. On the pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed three issues: (1) whether the provisions of the Act are ultra vires the Constitution, (2) whether the appellant was a hereditary office holder, and (3) whether the institution in dispute was a Sikh Gurdwara. Issue No. 1 was pressed and, therefore, the Tribunal in conformity with the previous decisions held the provisions of the Act to be intra vires the Constitution. On the second issue the Tribunal recorded a finding in favour of the appellant. On the third issue, the Tribunal held that the disputed institution was a Sikh Gurdwara.

5. The appellant feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the Tribunal took up the matter in appeal to the High Court and the High Court in its turn confirmed the findings of the Tribunal and dismissed the appeal by the impugned judgment. The appellant has now come to this Court on obtaining special leave and the only issue that survives for consideration by this Court is issue No. 3, that is, whether the institution in dispute is a Sikh Gurdwara.

6. Before dealing with the points urged by the counsel for the parties it would be appropriate at this stage to know the distinctive features of Sikhism and Sikh temples. Although for the purpose of historical research and analysis on such subject, the forum of a court of law is not ideal yet if the statute enjoins the Court to decide such questions, the Court has got to discharge the responsibility. Section 16 (1) of the Act provides:

"16 (1). Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law in force if in any proceeding before a tribunal it is disputed that a Gurdwara should or should not be declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara. the tribunal shall, before enquiring into any other matter in dispute relating to the said Gurdwara, decide whether it should or should not be declared a Sikh Gurdwara in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (2)."

7. One of the most fascinating aspects of Sikhism is the process which