Back
M. S. SONAK, R. N. LADDHA
Ramnath Vasudev Shanbhag – Appellant
Versus
Administrator Of Devalaya – Respondent
Key Points: - The Court held that non-Goan Mahazans are not barred from voting; Article 31(3) of the Devasthan Regulations guarantees Mahazans the right to vote for the Managing Committee, and bye-law Article 6 does not dilute that right (!) (!) (!) . - The Court found that the phrase "acts of management" in Article 6 of the bye-laws does not include the right to vote or contest elections, and there is no explicit bar on non-Goan Mahazans from voting (!) (!) . - The petition was allowed; the rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b), (d), and (e), quashing the list of capable Mahazans dated 15.01.2022 and directing counting of votes with separate ballot boxes, and transfer of charge within five days after declaration of results (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Interim arrangements and subsequent elections were ordered to be held with Goan and non-Goan voters in separate ballot boxes, with sealing and custody by the Administrator/Mamlatdar (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The Court criticized the Managing Committee’s process as flawed and potentially overreaching judicial orders, and remanded for merits, while safeguarding rights of non-Goan Mahazans to vote (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT
M.S. Sonak, J. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. The challenge in this petition is to removal of 2352 Mahazans out of a total of 3084, including the petitioners, from the list of capable Mahazans entitled to vote for constituting the Managing Committee of Shree Ramnath Devasthan Saunsthan, Zambaulim, (R-2). The Managing Committee, by proposing such large-scale deletions, has altered the status quo prevalent for at least the last 30 years or thereabouts. Moreover, the removal/deletion is on the sole ground that these 2352 Mahazans allegedly do not have a permanent residence in Goa. Therefore, the Managing Committee's interpretation of Articles 6 and 9 of the bye-laws, 1900 does not entitle them to vote.
4. For the elections scheduled on 13.03.2022, this Court, with the parties consent, made an order dated 08.03.2022, transcribed below for the convenience of reference.
"Heard Mr. G. K. Sardessai, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. D. Pangam, learned Advocate General with Ms. Maria Correia, learned Additional Government Advocate for respo
The court emphasized that active politicians are disqualified from being appointed as non-hereditary trustees, mandating adherence to established eligibility criteria and transparent selection proces....
The appointment of non-hereditary trustees must adhere to established eligibility criteria, ensuring that active politicians are disqualified, and the process must be fair and transparent.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
