Ramaswami, J.

1. In these applications which have been heard together an important question of law arises for determination, viz., whether the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act (Bihar Act 1 of 1951) is constitutionally valid.

2. In M. J. C. No. 418 the petitioner is Mahanth Moti Das whose muth is situated at village Parbatta in district of Monghyr. The Mahanth is a Bairagi and follower of the religion founded by Shri Kabir Sahib. The Mahanth states in the affidavit that the muth was founded for the spiritual benefit of a particular sect called Kabirpanthis whose doctrines are contrary to the beliefs of the Hindus. The Mahanth alleges that the properties of the muth have been treated as private properties and there is no trust imposed on these properties for any religious or charitable purpose. It is said that on 18-8-1952 a notice was served upon the Mahanth by the opposite party No. 1 under Sec. 59 of the impugned Act calling upon him to furnish a statement of the properties of the religious trust and threatening to prosecute him in case of default. It is contended for the petitioner that the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act is unconstitutional and void as its provisions violate Articles 14, 19(1) (f), 25, 26 and 27 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the religion founded by Kabir Sahib is not of Hindu origin and therefore the Act has no application to the petitioner or to the Asthal of which the petitioner is Mahanth. The petitioner prays that High Court should issue a writ in the nature of prohibition or mandamus against the opposite parties restraining them from interfering with the right of the petitioner to manage the properties of the muth.

3. In M. J. C. No. 415 the petitioner is Mahanth Sri Baijayananda Giri of Manik Chawk uth. The allegations of the petitioner are similar to those made in M. J. C. No. 418. The provisions of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act are challenged as unconstitutional and void and there is a further assertion on behalf of the petitioner that the properties of the muth are not trust properties at all and the Act has no application even if it is held that the Act does not violate any constitutional guarantee.

4. In the other Miscellaneous Judicial Cases the material facts alleged are of similar character.

5. It is necessary in the first place to set out the relevant provisions of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act (hereinafter referred to as the impugned, Act) for the purpose of reaching a conclusion as to its constitutional validity. The title of the Act is important. The Act is entitled

"an Act to provide for the better administration of Hindu Religious Trusts and for the protection and preservation of properties appertaining to such trusts."

The preamble states :

"Whereas it is expedient to provide for the better administration of Hindu religious trusts in the State of Bihar and for the protection and preservation of properties appertaining to such trusts."

The preamble is followed by definitions in Sec.2. Sec.2(e) defines a Hindu to mean a person professing any religion of Hindu origin and to include a Jain and a Budhist, but not a Sikh. Sec.2(1) defines a religious trust to mean any express or constructive trust created or existing for any purpose recognised by Hindu Law to be religious, pious or charitable, but not to include a trust created according to the Sikh religion or purely for the benefit of the Sikh community or a private endowment created for the worship of a family idol in which the public are not interested.

Sec.2(n) defines a trustee to mean any person appointed to administer a religious trust either verbally or by or under any deed or instrument or in accordance with the usage of such trust or by the District Judge or any other competent authority. Sec. 5 provides for the constitution of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts. Sec. 5(3) states that the Board shall be a body corporate and shall have perpetual succession and a common seal