Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1996 (5) TMI 431

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the State of Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU) on the latter's formation as a part B State under the Constitution. Later the State of PEPSU was merged with effect from 1.11.1956 in the State of Punjab whereat beforehand the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 thereinafter referred to as the Act, stood enforced. Later, by Punjab Act No. 1 of 1959, the said Act was extended to the territories, which immediately before the 1st November, 1956, were comprised in the State of Punjab and Patiala and East Punjab States Union. The institution in question stands located in the extended territories. Dispute arose whether the said institution is a Sikh Gurdwara or not. The scheme of the Act is to give to the Sikhs their religious shrines or places of worship in accordance with the procedure devised in the Act. Those have been divided into two categories. Regarding those about which no substantial doubt existed they found their way out-right in Schedule I and their management vesting to be carried out as provided in Part III. Regarding the second category of the doubtful ones, their nature as to whether they were Sikh Gurdwaras or not, was determinable substantively in accordance with th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate of the publication of the notification, a petition signed and verified by the petitioner, or petitioners, as the case may be claiming that the Gurdwara is not a Sikh Gurdwara, and may in such petition make a further claim that any hereditary office-holder or any person who would have succeeded to such office-holder under the system of management prevailing before the first day of January, 1920, or, in the case of the extended territories, before the first day of November, 1956, as the case may be, may be restored to office on the grounds that such Gurdwara is not a Sikh Gurdwara and that such office-holder ceased to be an office-holder after that day. Provided that the State Government may in respect of any such Gurdwara declare by notification that a petition of twenty or more worshippers of such Gurdwara shall be deemed to be duly forwarded whether the petitioners were or were not on the commencement of this Act or, in the case of the extended territories, on the commencement of the Amending Act, as the case may be, residents in the police station area in which such Gurdwara is situated, and shall thereafter deal with any petition that may be otherwise duly forwarded in re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the presentation of the petition under sub-section (1) of section 7]; or (iii) was established for use by Sikhs for the purpose of public worship and was used for such worship by Sikhs, before and at the time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (1) of section 7 ; or (iv) was established in memory of a Sikh martyr, saint or historical person and was used for public worship by Sikhs, before and at the time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (1) of section 7; or (v) owing to some incident connected with the Sikh religion was used for public worship predominantly by Sikhs, before and at the time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (1) of section 7, the tribunal shall decide that it should be declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara, and record an order accordingly. (3) Where the tribunal finds that a gurdwara should not be declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara it shall record its finding in an order, send subject before the first day of November, 1956, the tribunal shall, notwithstanding such finding continue to have jurisdiction in all matters relating to such claim; and if the tribunal finds it proved that such office-holder ceased .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... igin. They are the followers of Baba Sir Chand. Unlike the Sikhs, they sometime worship idols and Smadhs of their monastic ancestors. They worship other objects too, such as the ball of ashes etc. They are considered to be Hindus and at times called Sikhs in the wider sense of the term. They bear reverence to the Guru Granth Sahib and read it without renouncing Hinduism. An institution of this kind where a Udasi recites Guru Granth Sahib in the presence of a Sikh congregation by itself is not enough to declare the institution to be a Sikh Gurdwara, unless it stands proved that the institution was established for use by Sikhs for the purpose of public worship and was used for such worship by Since as per requirement of Section 16 (2) (III) of the Act. Notice was issued to the Sikh Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, the respondent herein by the Tribunal. The Committee in its written statement challenged the status of Mahant Uttam Das as the hereditary office holder, The locus standi of Uttam Das to file the petition was also challenged on the ground that no mode of succession to the office of the hereditary office holder was disclosed in the petition, It was countered that the Rule of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 8 when failing on the basis of the locus standi, would tantamount to filing no petition at all. We have strong reservations to such unpurposive view of the High Court for more than one reason. The marginal note/caption to Section 16 is the foremost pointer that the issue whether the Institution in question is a Sikh Gurdwara or not, has to be decided first and other questions later. The marginal notes or captions are, undoubtedly, part and parcel of legislative exercise and the language employed therein provides the key to the legislative intent. The words so employed are not mere surplus age. Secondly, for the purposes of Section 8, the averments made therein by the hereditary office-holder need be taken as sufficient on their face value, bestowing jurisdiction on the Tribunal relating to the Institution in question. The fact that a petition under Section 8 was received, per se ousts applicability of Section 9 because that can operate only when no claim under Section 8 is preferred at all. Thirdly, when the issue of locus standi, at the very threshold, is a triable issue, that per se obligates the tribunal to priorly decide the question of the Institution being a Sikh Gurd .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion of Kahan Dass, one of the petitioner's ancestor that he recited and displayed Guru Granth Sahib. The question that arises is, whether these facts are enough to prove that this institution was established for use by Sikhs for the purpose of public worship, which is an essential ingredient of Section 16(2)(iii) of the Act, under which the respondent- committee claims it to be a Sikh Gurudwara. Though, we are clear in our mind that Guru Granth Sahib had been the only object of worship in this institution during the time of Mahant Kahan Dass and no other mode of worship was carried on in it at any time, we are constrained to hold that this fact by itself does not suffice to prove that it is a Sikh Gurdwara. It is, however, established beyond doubt that the petitioner's claim that it is an Udasi institution has no basis. All that we can say is that it is a charitable institution meant for the upkeep and maintenance of the blind and for running the Langar to provide food to the travellers and other needy persons who visit this Dera. As a result of the above discussion, we allow the petition and find that the institution in dispute mentioned in Notification No.1415-GP., dat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... us by devolution according to hereditary right or by nomination as per custom of the institution. Here, the controversy between the parties is as to the accuracy and sufficiency of pleadings in this regard, on which learned counsel for the parties were at variance loaded as they were with case law on that aspect as developed in the High Court. The High Court primarily based its decision on a Full Bench decision of that Court in Hari Kishan Chela Daya Singh Vs. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar Ors. AIR 1976 Punjab Haryana 130. The view taken therein was that the person claiming himself to be a hereditary office holder must allege and prove the complete and consistent Rule of Descent covering all eventualities by which he or his predecessor had and could have come to hold the office on the prescribed date. Any omission therein of whatever magnitude, big or small, was viewed as fatal to his locus standi. Strictness was ordered to rule the roost. The rule of strictness in pleadings was not adhered to in a subsequent Full Bench decision in Mahant Budh Dass's case [supra] and gave way to the principle of 'substantial compliance'. The view taken .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant and his predecessors came to hold the office either by way of hereditary right or by nomination. The Bench heavily leaned on Hari Kishan's case, bypassed Mahant Budh Dass's case even though noticed, by trailing to a number of Division Bench cases based on Hari Kishan's case. On that basis, it went on to record satisfaction that the averments, as required by Hari Kishan's case, did not meet its standards. It observed as follows : Since the petition does not contain any averment about any usage or custom of inheritance or nomination for succession the petitioner has failed to bring himself within the definition of hereditary office-holder as defined in Section 2(4)(iv) of the Act as interpreted by various Full Benches and Division Benches of this Court. The nature of the Institution, it being of a charitable nature, as determined by the Tribunal, was therefore left uninterfered with. There was no cross-appeal at the instance of the Present appellant before the High Court as to the competency of the Tribunal to give such finding after finding that the Institution was not a Sikh Gurdwara. The appellant, prima facie, submitted to the finding as to the nature of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates