Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Ashok Kumar Gaur, J.
Mahant Ramprakash Das Swami – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (i), Devsthan Department, Jaipur (raj.). – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14442/2019
Decided On : 02-05-2022
Rajasthan Public Trust Act - Dispute over succession to trusteeship - Section 23 of the Act of 1959
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged orders dismissing his application under Section 23 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (the Act of 1959) and allowing the respondent's application. The petitioner claimed to be the adopted 'Chaila' and successor of the late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami, while the respondent also claimed trusteeship based on a family resolution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not fulfill the eligibility criteria as per the amended constitution of the Trust, which required the successor to be from the Khalsa family and unmarried. The court also noted that the Assistant Commissioner had the authority to entertain the application under Section 23 of the Act of 1959, as the petitioner himself had filed such an application.
Issues: Dispute over succession to trusteeship, interpretation of the amended constitution, and the authority of the Assistant Commissioner under Section 23 of the Act of 1959.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Assistant Commissioner had the authority to entertain applications under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 and that the petitioner did not fulfill the eligibility criteria as per the amended constitution.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and Commissioner, Devasthan Department.
JUDGMENT
1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 07.06.2019 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Jaipur and the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Commissioner, Devasthan Department. The petitioner has also prayed that Application No.59/17 filed by him under Section 23 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1959') along with Proforma-8 may be allowed and the Application No.58/17 filed by the respondent No.2 under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 along with Proforma-8, may be dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case, as pleaded by the petitioner in the writ petition, are that Dadu Dwara, Ramganj Bazaar, Jaipur is a registered Trust having its registration No.321/71 and the said Trust was registered at the instance of late Mahant Shri Ramprasad Das Swami. On death of Mahant Shri Ramprasad Das Swami, Mahant Hanuman Das Swami became sole trustee of the Trust and Mahant Hanuman Das Swami expired on 14.09.2017.
3. The petitioner has pleaded that late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami had adopted him as 'Chaila' during his lifetime, accordingly to customs of Dadu Sect. The petitioner has further pleaded that in all the documents issued in favour of the petitioner like Election Identity Card, PAN Card and Aadhar Card, late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami has been shown as his father.
4. The petitioner has pleaded that the petitioner was appointed as Pujari/Manager of the temple of Hanumanji and during the lifetime of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami, he had executed a declaration dated 25.01.2017, regarding succession in favour of the petitioner.
5. The petitioner has averred that the said declaration of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami, had declared the petitioner to be the Mahant of Dadu Dwara, Ramganj Bazaar, Jaipur. The petitioner on expiry of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami on 14.09.2017, has claimed to have preformed all customs of a 'Chaila' and 'Chaddar Dastoor' was also held by Mahant and Sant of Dadu Sect.
Accordingly a news item was published on 19.09.2017 and certificate was also issued by Pradhan Peeth, Dadu Sampraday (Sect), Narayana in favour of the petitioner.
6. The petitioner has pleaded that on 05.10.2017 he filed an application under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 along with proforma-8 before the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Jaipur for entering his name in the Trust Register in place of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami, as the petitioner was declared as Mahant of Dadu Dwara, Ramganj Bazaar, Jaipur. The said application filed by the petitioner was registered as Application No.59/17.
7. The petitioner has pleaded that the respondent No.2 filed objection to the above application filed by the petitioner and simultaneously, also filed an application under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 along with proforma-8 pleading that he was appointed as Mahant of Dadu Dwara, Ramganj Bazaar, Jaipur for which a 'Chaddar Dastoor' was performed by the family members of Mahant Santosh Das and as such, according to the amended constitution of the Trust, his name was required to be entered in the Trust Register in place of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami. The said application filed by the respondent No.2 was registered as Application No.58/17.
8. The petitioner has pleaded that late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami during his lifetime also filed an application No.51/16 for amending the constitution of Trust and also submitted the amended constitution of the Trust but subsequently again an application dated 06.02.2017 for submitting amended constitution was filed along with the amended constitution. The petitioner has alleged that on the said application, filed by late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami, hearing of the arguments had taken place on 29.05.2017, however, on death of late Mahant Hanuman Das Swami on 14.09.2017, nobody appeared in the proceedings initiated for amendment of the constitution and as such, on 11.03.2019 proceedings of Case No.51/2016 were dropped by the
The court clarified the authority of the Assistant Commissioner under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 and interpreted the eligibility criteria for trusteeship as per the amended constitution of the Tru....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the maintainability of appeals under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and the validity of the findings of the Appellate Authority. The judgmen....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a person interested in a Public Trust to challenge the finding of the Registrar and the necessity of a notice under Section 80 ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of the settlement of the scheme for the better administration of the trust under Section 50a(1) of the Trusts act, 1950, and the affi....
The court affirmed that interested persons in public trust matters have the right to join proceedings, and the concept of abatement does not apply, ensuring that inquiries can continue effectively.
Point of Law : If an appeal has been filed therefrom, in accordance with decision of Commissioner on such appeal and provisions of section 21 and 22 shall apply to such amended entries as they apply ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the authority to provisionally accept the change report and decide the inquiry within a stipulated period, as per the provisions ....
The appointment of Mahant is non-hereditary, governed by a systematic selection process by the State, with properties belonging to the idol, asserting the guardian role of the State.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a judgment or decree obtained by playing fraud on the court is a nullity and non est in the eyes of the law. The court emphasized that an orde....
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
