Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KARDAK ETE
Abul Hussain S/o Abdul Gafur – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the formation of new management committee. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. petitioners argue for inclusion based on historical rights. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. state's rationale for forming a new committee. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. historical context of the masjid and concerns of local population. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. legal rights concerning management of religious institutions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. the court's view on state involvement in management decisions. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 7. final decision: writ petitions dismissed. (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT :
KARDAK ETE, J.
1. Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate and Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 5, and Mr. A. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6.
2. By filing these writ petitions, the petitioners have put to challenge the impugned order dated 24.01.2022, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri, by which it is directed to form a new management committee of Panbari Masjid within 31.01.2022 from seven villages on the basis of immediate geographical contiguity, r
The State's interference in the management of religious denominations must only address law and order, maintaining the autonomy of religious practices and their management according to historical and....
State authorities cannot interfere in the management of religious institutions without legal authority, as guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
Supersession of a religious trust committee must comply with statutory provisions; failure to do so renders the action arbitrary and subject to judicial review.
Once the Court has intrinsic material to accept that the faith or the belief is genuine and not a pretence, it must defer to the belief of the worshipper This, we must do well to recognise, applies a....
The High Court refrained from granting any declaration as to who is the actual person who has a right to exercise the shebait rights or any other right relatable to the temple. The Court left open th....
Stray incidents do not justify blanket executive ban on religious festival celebrations in temple under Articles 25, 26; rights prevail subject to reasonable restrictions with proximate nexus to publ....
The court ruled that the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act does not permit the formation of a committee to oversee the actions of a hereditary trustee.
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
