Orders passed by scheme court are not appealable.

N.V.Balasubramanian, J.: There are ten appeals and two civil revision petitions arising out of a common order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thanjavur in O.S. No.6 of 1970 dated 25.9.2001 wherein learned Scheme Judge (Principal District Judge, Thanjavur) appointed certain trustees, both hereditary and non-hereditary, for the administration of a wakf, that is, M.K.N. Madarasa, Adirampattinam. The appeals and civil revision petitions have been preferred by the persons who were not selected by the learned Scheme Judge, and we find it almost a common feature that the unsuccessful candidates who were not selected approach this Court against the order of selection at every selection made and the litigation goes on endlessly. It is painful to note that serious allegations and counter allegations have been made by one party against the other and the Courts have interfered on more than one occasion to set right the affairs of the trust so that the trust is properly conducted and the college and the school run by the trust are properly run. No doubt, it is recognised that aggrieved parties have the necessary right and remedy to approach the higher Courts, but the level of accusation made by one party against others, to say the least, is unmatched as seen during the course of long arguments of the case. As already observed by us, it is not a new litigation as the non-selected candidates in the earlier years also had knocked at the doors of the Court on many occasions and the Court had the opportunity, on more than one occasion, to decide the matter on merits.

2. The history of the trust is narrated in an unreported judgment in C.R.P. No.2646 of 1995 dated 14.12.1995 by Mr.M.Srinivasan, J. (as His Lordship then was) and Mr.S.S.Subramani, J. On 16.2.1900 and 6.4.1901 two gift deeds in the nature of wakf had been created by one Haji Khader Mohideen and his three brothers for the purpose of creating and managing a Veda Padasala in Arabic (it should be properly called, ‘Madarasa’) and extensive properties were also donated for the said purpose. The four brothers who are the donors constituted themselves as trustees for life by way of documents wherein provisions were also made for their successors.

3. During the actual working of the wakf, the provisions made in the document were found to be inadequate on many aspects for proper management of the trust, and hence, a scheme suit was filed in O.S. No.16 of 1943 on the file of the District Court, Thanjavur for preparation of a scheme. A scheme decree was drawn by the District Judge, Thanjavur and under the said decree, provisions were made for the appointment of three hereditary trustees, one from each of the three branches and also for the appointment of six non-hereditary trustees to be appointed by the District Court. The scheme decree prepared in O.S. No.16 of 1943 was subsequently found to be insufficient and consequently, another scheme suit was filed in O.S. No.21 of 1952 on the file of District Court, Thanjavur and a scheme decree was also passed in O.S. No.21 of 1952.

4. Thereafter, the present suit in O.S. No.6 of 1970 was filed before the District Court, Thanjavur for preparation of a scheme. Learned District Judge, Thanjavur passed a decree modifying the earlier decree in O.S. No.21 of 1952 and held that the proportion of hereditary and non-hereditary in the Board of Management should be 2:1, and hereditary trustees should be appointed to hold the post for life and non-hereditary trustees should be appointed for a period of five years.

5. The decree passed in the scheme suit was subject matter of appeal before this Court in A.S. No.992 of 1978 A.M.Naina Mohammed Thambi and others v. S.K.Sheik Jalaludeen and others, (1994)1 L.W. 18 (J.S.) and the question that arose before the Division Bench of this Court was whether the term of office fixed by the learned District Judge is proper and in accordance with the intention of the founders of the trust. The Division B