N.A. Britto, J.

Heard Mr. S.G. Dessai, the learned senior counsel on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. A.D. Bhobe, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 7.

2. This petition was filed to assail the order dated 6.10.2005 of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Vasco-da-Gama.

3. The dispute between the parties is regarding the management of a mosque built on chalta No. 201 under PT Sheet No. 155. There is no dispute that initially the said property was purchased by sale deed dated 14.6.1991 by 6 persons, namely the first and the fifth petitioners, the second and the third respondents. Mohamed Yusuf Menon and Ismail Khan and later with individual contributions as well as with public donations a Mosque/Masjid was erected in the year 1992 under the leadership of Farooq Ahmed Shaikh (respondent No.2) and a room for the residence of Pesh- imam was constructed. Although the said property was purchased with a view to form a trust to be known as Tanzime Ahle Sunnat, the same was never formed nor registered but petitioner Nos. 1. 3, 5 and 6 formed a society on or about 21.10.2003 known as Intizamia Committee of Masjid-e-Taiba and its name was subsequently changed into Intizamia Committee of Sunni Masjid-e- Tabia and Madersa-e-Ghausia. The real disputes between the petitioners and the respondents presumably started around 12.4.2005 when the Pesh-imam (respondent No.4) proceeded on leave of 45 days and in his place Sultan Rizwi was appointed. The respondents claim that it is they who sanctioned his leave from 12.4.2005 to 26.5.2005. The petitioners claimed that they terminated his services from 15.4.2005. Both the parties claim that each of them had brought in Sultan Rizwi as Pesh-imam.

4. On or about 11.5.2005 the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (two out of six original purchasers of the plot) filed an application to the police authorities. On the same day they filed a suit in the name of the trust which came to be dismissed subsequently on 24.6.2005. Pursuant to the said application dated 11.5.2005, the Vasco Police Station submitted a report to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Vasco-da-Gama to initiate action under Section 107 of the Code (Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) as a result of which the learned SOM passed an order dated 9.6.2005. The said order was as follows :

(1) As a preventive measure the Managing Committee under the name Intizamia Committee of Sunni Masjid-e-Taiba. Party II registered under registration No. 256/Goa/03 a Government of Goa, shall perform the prayers meetj religious Assembly as scheduled through their Maulana.

(2) The members of Tanzim Ahle Sunnat (Trust) i.e. party I shall not interfere in the affairs till the meeting of the new committee to be formed is conducted as per law in force.

5. The respondent Nos. 2 to 8 challenged the said order before this Court in writ petition No. 212 of 2005 which writ petition came to be disposed of by order dated 29.6.2005. The main grievance of the respondent Nos. 2 to 8, before this Court in the said writ petition was that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate had not heard them before passing the said order dated 9.6.2005. This Court noted that there were two parties, one in the name of Tanzim Ahle Sunnat and the other in the name of Intizamia Committee of Sunni Masjid-e-Taiba who claimed the right to manage the affairs of the mosque. This Court also noted that the impugned order dated 9.6.2005 did not clarify as to who will take steps to form the new Committee, whether the registered society of the Intizamia Committee or the Tanzim Ahle Sunnat. This Court expressed the hope that it would be in the interest of the management of the mosque that the new Committee was formed c from amongst the members of both the rival groups provided they agreed to forget their past differences and were interested in the proper management of the affairs of the mosque and in that event, the lower authority might have to depute certain person to call for the meeting for the purpose of