Honble SINGHAL, J. – The present writ petition has been filed by the followers of Ram Snehi Charitable Trust who are aggrieved by the action of the trustees in disposing of the trust property.

(2). It is stated that Ramdwara is a religious place where all types of religious activities are undertaken. In the reply submitted this fact has not been denied by the respondent No.7 Ghanshyam Das Sindhi and respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have admitted that the said place is used for religious discourse of Ram Snehi Trust.

(3). It is submitted and a prayer is made that the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 should ensure the demolition of the construction of the property and it should not be considered to be a case of deemed sanction. The property in question was sold on 27th March 1989 by a registered sale-deed for a sum of Rs. Six lacs. On the basis of this fact it is submitted that the trust has no power to dispose of the property. It is submitted that the religious placed of worship cannot be sold. It is submitted that para 415 of Principles of Hindu Law by Mulla is as under :–

``Alienation of debutter property :– (1) As a general rule of Hindu law,

property given for the maintenance of religious worship, and of charities connected with it, is inalienable. It is competent however, for the shebait or mohunt in charge of the property, in his capacity of shebait or mohunt as manager of the property, to incur debts and borrow money on a mortgage of the property for the purpose of keeping up the religious worship, and for the benefit and preservation of the property. The power, however, to incur debts must be measu- red by an existing necessity for incurring them.

(2) The power of a shebait or a mohunt to alienate debutter property is analogous to that of a manager for an infant heir as defined by the Judicial Committee in Hunooman Persaud vs. Mussamat Babooee (1856) 6 MLA 393. As held in that case he has no power to alienate debutter property except `in a case of need or for the benefit of the estate. He is not entitled to sell the property for the purpose of investing the price of it so as to bring in an income larger than derived from the property itself. Nor can he, except for legal necessity, grant a permanent lease of debutter property, though he may create proper derivative tenures and estates conformable to usage. Where, however, a grant of a permanent lease has been affirmed by judgment of the Court, the judgment will operate as resjudicata and the succeeding shebait or mohunt will be bound by it.

(4). Attention has also been drawn to the provisions of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 wherein previous sanction is required to be obtained for transfer u/s 31. The provisions of Sec. 31 are as under :–

``Previous sanction to be obtained for certain transfers : (1) Subject to the directions in the instrument of trust or any direction given under this Act or any other law by any court –

(a) no sale, exchange or gift of any immovable property or of movable property exeeding five thousand rupees in value, and

(b) no lease, for a period exceeding five years in the case of agricultural land or for a period exceeding three years in the case of non-agricultural land or a building, belonging to a public trust shall be valid without the previous sanction of the Assistant Commissioner,

(2) An application for the sanction of the Assistant Commissioner under sub-section (1) shall be made in the prescribed manner and form.

(3) Where, on an application duly made for sanction in respect of any transaction specified in sub-section (1), the Assistant Commissioner does not, within two months of the receipt thereof, pass final orders, it shall be presumed that he has accorded sanction in respect of that transaction; provided that the application described the transaction with sufficientaccuracy.

(4) The Assistant Commissioner shall not refuse to accord sanction in respect of any transaction specified. In sub-section (1) unless such transaction is, in his opinion, likely to be pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document