Holding

Sections 8 and 10 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 operate in different fields; a Section 10 petition is not barred by a Section 9 notification, and the institution fails to meet the essential criteria of a Sikh Gurdwara, rendering the property private and the appeals dismissed.

Summary

The case concerned a dispute over whether a property in Kot Fatta, Bhatinda, was a Sikh Gurdwara and whether it belonged to the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) or to Mahant Sarna Ram, an Udasi. The Tribunal had treated petitions under Sections 8 and 10 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 as a composite filing and declared the building a Gurdwara, attaching the land to it. On appeal, the High Court held that the petitions were solely under Section 10 and that the Tribunal’s composite approach was erroneous, also finding that Sarna Ram belonged to the Udasi order. The Supreme Court affirmed that Sections 8 and 10 operate in distinct fields, so a Section 10 petition is not barred by a Section 9 notification, and that the essential criteria of Section 16(2)—presence of Guru Granth Sahib, congregational worship and a Nishan Sahib—were not satisfied, making the institution a private Udasi residence. Consequently, the presumption under Section 18(1)(g) did not convert the property into religious property, and the earlier 1949 suit was not res judicata. The Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the SGPC’s claim that the property was not a Sikh Gurdwara.

Issues considered

The scope and relationship between Sections 8 and 10 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925.
Whether a petition under Section 10 is excluded by a notification under Section 9.
The applicability of the presumption under Section 18(1)(g) to property inherited by an Udasi Mahant.
Whether affiliation with the Udasi order makes an institution a Sikh Gurdwara.
Whether the Tribunal correctly treated the petitions as a composite filing.
The effect of the 1949 civil suit on the present proceedings (res judicata).
Whether the institution satisfies the criteria of Section 16(2) for declaration as a Sikh Gurdwara.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s. 11
Indian Evidence Act, 1872s. 13
Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887s. 44
Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925s. 10, s. 14, s. 16(2), s. 18(1)(g), s. 7, s. 8, s. 9

Subjects

Sikh Gurdwaras ActSection 8Section 10Section 9 notificationUdasi sectReligious propertyPresumption under Section 18(1)(g)Composite petitionRes judicataProperty rightsGurdwara declaration

Judgment

A SHIROMANI OURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE,
AMRITSAR
v.
8AOGA SINGH AND ORS.
•
DECEMBER 3, 2002 \
B.
[SHIVARAJ V. l>A TIL AND ARIJIT PASA YAT, JJ.]

Sikh Gurdwaras Act, J925:
c Sections 8, 9 and JO-Application uls JO-Treatment of as composite
application ulss 8 and JO-Propriety of-Held not proper as both the Sections
operate in different fields-Notification uls 9 does not exclude application
u!s JO.

D J6(2)-Sikh Gurdwara-Character-Determination of-Held, the sine
qua non/or an institution to be treated as Sikh Gurdwara is that there should
be established Guru Granth Sahib, worship of the same by congregation and
a Nishan Sahib-Reading of Guru Granth Sa~ib, by Udasi, -who may also
follow some of the practices of Hindu traditional religion by itself is not
decisive of character of the institution.
E
The property in question had been declared to be in absolute ownership
of 'S'-an 'Udasi'. Petition under Section 7 of Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 was r
filed for declaration of the institution in question as Sikh Gurdwara and
property in question as the property attached to the Gurdwara. 'S' filed petition
under Section 10 of the Act claiming that the alleged institution was not a
F Sikh Gurdwara but his residential house and the land ~lleged to be belonging
to Gurdwara was his property. Another petition by the alienees of 'S' under
Section 10 of the Act supported the case of 'S'. Tribunal treated the petitions
as a composite one under Sections 8 and 10 and rejected both the petitions
under Section 8 as not maintainable and in respect of the petitions under
G ·Section 10 it was held by the Tribunal that the building in question was a
Gurdwara ·and the land attached to it belonged to the Gurdwara.

Against the judgment of the Tribunal legal representatives and alienees
of'S' filed appeals. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, as a
consequence of the order of the Tribunal, filed suits under Section 25-A of
H 482
SHIROMANIGURDWARA PARBANDHAKCOMM. , .. BAGGASINGH 483
the Act, one against the legal representatives and another against alienees of A
'S'. Decreeing the suits and dismissing the appeals the Tribunal held the
institution to be a Sikh Gurdwara; that presumption attached to the entries
in ,Jamabandi under Section 44 ofihe Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 was
rebutted by the presumption under Section 18(l)(g) of the Act; and that 'S'
had no right, title or interest in the land which belonged to the Gurdwara and B
thus the transfer in favour of the alienees by the sale deed was of no
consequence.

On appeal, High Court held that the application was not a composite
one under Sections 8 and 10 of the Act but the same was under Section 10
and artificial bifurcation made by the Tribunal was not proper; that the entries C
in the documents on record showing 'S' and his Guru from 'kaum' of"Sadh
Bairagi" do not warrant any presumption that mere passing from Guru to
Chela was indicative of its religious character; and thaj the Judgment in suit
of 1949 was relevant under Section 13 of the Evidence Act , 1872.

In appeal to this Court, appellant contended that with the Notification D
under Section 9 of the Act, petition in Section 10 was excluded; that entries
showing 'S' acquiring the property by succession from his Guru established
that the property was a religious property; that petition under Section 10 was
misconceived; that conclusion of the Tribunal that the petition was composite
one under Sections 8 and 10 of the Act and its observations that the petition
was incompetent had attained finality; that presumption under Section 44 of E
the Revenue Act was rebutted in view of Section 18(l)(g) of the Act; that since
Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee was not a party in suit of 1949,
the decision in suit did not operate as res judicata; and that there was no
material to show that 'S' belonged to 'Udasi' order.
F
Dismissing the appeals, the Court

HELD: 1. Sections 8 and 10 of Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 operate in
different fields. While Section 8 deals with the nature and character of the
institution, Section 10 deals with adjudication of right, title and interest of
the applicant. Since they operate in different fields, it cannot be said that an . G
application under Section 10 was excluded when notification under Section 9
was issued by the Government. (495-F, G(

2. High Court was not in error in holding that 'S' belonged to Udasi
order. The same is clearly establish~d in view of the evidence, more
particularly, that of PW 10, wt.o hasstated that 'S' is the Chela of 'C'. The· H
484 SUPREME COURT· REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A property which 'S' claimed devolved upon him from his guru both of them
were Udasi Sadhus. In the Jamabandi records the kaum of 'C' and 'S' was
recorded to be, "Sadh Bairagi". The descent of the property from a guru to
his chela does not warrant the presumption that it is religious property.
(495-H; 496-A, B, FJ

B Pandit Parma Nand v. Nihal Chand and Anr., AIR (1938) PC 195, relied
on.

3. The sine qua non for an institution, to be treated as Sikh Gurdwara
is that there should be established Guru Granth Sahib, and the wor.ship of
the same by congregation, and a Nishan sahib. There may be other rooms of
C the institution made for other purposes but the crucial test is the existence
of Guru Granth Sahib and the worshippers thereof by the congregation and
Nishan Sahib. Unless the claim falls within one or the other of the categories
enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 16, the institution cannot be declared
to be a Sikh Gurdwara. [497-H; 498~A, B]
D
Pritam Dass Mahant v. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee,
AIR (1984) SC 858, relied on.

4. Udasis form an independent sect. They do venerate Sikh scriptures.
Therefore, in an institution ofUdasis sect, one can visualize reading ofGranth
E Sahib or veneration of Sikh scriptures. That itself is not decisive of the
character of the institution. On the contrary, where the succession was from
Guru to Chela and those gurus were followers of Udasis faith and the
institution was known as Dera of Udasi Bhekh and they followed some of the
practices of Hindu traditional religion, such things were completely
destructive of the character of the institution as Sikh Gurdwara. (498-C, DJ
F
Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar v. Mahant
Kirpa Ram and Ors., AIR (1984) SC 1059, relied on.

Kahan Dass v. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, Lahore,
AIR [1934] Lahore 68 and Sunder Singh and Ors. v. Mahant Narain Dass
G and Ors., AIR [1934] Lahore 920, referred to.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3350-54 of
1993.

From the Judgment and Order dated 13.9.1991 of the Punjab and Haryana
H High Court in F.A.O. Nos. 434, 435/78, 34, 144 and 198of1980.
SHIROMANIGURDWARAPARBANDHAKCOMM_1·. BAGGASINGH[ARIJITPASA YAT.J] 485

Har Dev Singh and Ms. Madhu Moolchandani, for the Appellants. A
O.P. Shanna, R.C. Gubrele, K.R. Gupta. Ms. Nanita Shamia, Yivek Shanna.
Abhishek Arrey and Rajbalam Sharma, for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
B
ARIJIT PASA Y AT, J. These five appeals by special leave arise from a
common judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court. The five appeals before it were directed against the order dated 1.8. 1978
passed by the Sikh Gurdwaras Tribunal Punjab, Chandigarh (in short 'the
Tribunal') in Petition nos. 663 and 654 of 1975.
c
Synoptical resume of the factual position is as follows:

One Bakhtawar Singh and fifty nine other worshippers of an institution
alleged to be Gurdwara Sahib Ji situated in the revenue estate of Kot Fatta,
Tehsil and bistrict Bhatinda filed a petition under suli-section (I) of Section
7 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (in short 'the Act') to the appropriate D
Secretary, Government of Punjab, praying, inter alia, that the said institution
be declared as Sikh Gurdwara and properties mentioned in the petition be
declared as belonging to the Gurdwara. The appropriate Secretary to the
Government of Punjab, in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the Act
published the petition along with rights, titles and interests showing rights, E
titles and interests belonging to the Gurdwara in question vide notification
in the Punjab Government Gazette dated 4. 11.1974. One Mahan! Sarna Ram,
an Udasi, filed a petition under Section 10 of the Act claiming that there was
no Sikh Gurdwara in existence, the alleged institution was his residential
house, and agricultural land alleged to be belonging to the Gurdwara was his
property. One Ramji Dass and others also filed identical petition stating that F
the alleged Gurdwara building was residential house of Sarna Ram Chela Chet
Ram and the agricultural land belonged to him and they have purchased
about 60 Kanals of land from him. Both these petitions were forwarded by the
appropriate Secretary to the Government of Punjab to the Tribunal under sub-
section (I) of Section 14 of the Act. Tribunal treated the petition to be a G
composite one under Sections 8 and 10 of the Act. By its order dated
22.7.1975 Tribunal held that since Sarna Ram had not claimed that he was a
hereditary office holder of the institution in dispute, he had no locus standi
to file the petition under Section 8. Ramji Dass and others neither claimed any
personal interest in the Gurdwara building nor did the~ claim to be worshippers
or hereditary office-holders of the institution and their petition was similarly H
486 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A not maintainable. However, the Tribunal proceeded to deal with the petition
under Section I 0. It is to be noted that the Tribunal registered the petitions
as No. 663/1975 (Bagga Singh and Anr. v. S.G.P.C. Amritsar) filed by Sarna
Ram and No.654/1975 (Ram.Ji Dass and Ors. v. S. G. P. C. Amritsar) filed by
. Ra.mj i Das and others. The petitions under Section I 0 of the Act were registered
B giving identical numbers. Yide its order dated 31. 7 .1978 the Tribunal held that
the building in question was a Gurdwara and the land attached to it belonged
to the Gurdwara in question.

Challenging the correctness of said order, the successors-in-interest of
late Mahant Sarna Ram filed First Appeal No. 434 of 1978 and the alienees
C from late Mahant Sarna Ram assailed the order in First Appeal no. 435 of 1978.
As a consequence of the order dated 31.7.1978 passed by the Tribunal,
Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to
as 'the Committee') filed two suit~ under Section 25-A of the Act. One was
against Bagga Singh and Darshan Singh, legal representatives of late Mahant
Sarna Ram and the other against Ramji Dass and others who were alienees
D from aforesaid late Mahant Sarna Ram and these were registered as suit N(_),s.
89 and 90 of 197_9 respectively. Both these suits were decreed by the Tribunal
by order dated 18.12.1979 and decrees were passed in favour of the Committee.
Aforesaid decrees were challenged in First Appeal nos. 34 of 1980, 198 of 1980
and 144 of1980.
E Tribunal, inter alia, came to the conclusion on consideration of the oral
and documentary evidence that the institution in question was a Sikh Gurdwara.
It placed reliance on the two decisions of the Lahore High Court in Kahan
Dass v. Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Lahore, AIR (1934)
Lahore 68 and Sunder Singh and Ors. v. Mahan! Narain Dass and Ors., AIR
F (1934) Lahore 920.

Tribunal also noticed that after a petition is dismissed by reason of its
incompetence it must be taken not to have been presented in accordance with
the provisions of Section 8 and the local Government could notify the
institution under Section 9. Consequence of such notification is that the
G Gurdwara was to be declared as a Sikh Gurdwara. Further Section 18(1 )(g)
raised a presumption that where assignment of land is made by way of
succession from Guru to Che la, the presumption under Section 18( l )(g) arises.
It was further held that presumption attached to the entries in the Jamabandi
under Section 44 of the Punjab 1--and Revenue Act, 1887 ( in short 'Revenue
H Act') is rebutted by the presumption under Section 18(1 )(g) of the Act.
SHIROMA NI GURDWARA PARBANDHAKCOMM v. BAGGASINGH[ARIJIT PASA YAT,J.] 487

Dismissing Sarna Ram's petition it was held that he had no right, title or A
interest in the land which belonged to the Gurdwara. As a consequence, other
applications filed by Ramji Dass and others were not ente11ain•ble and,
therefore, the transfer in favour of the alienees by the sale-deed was of no
consequence.

Before the High Court, stand of the appellants in the appeals was that B
the Tribunal's approach was clearly erroneous. It committed first faux pas by
treating applications to be composite one under Sections 8 and 10 of the Act.
The parameters of Sections 8 and I 0 are entirely different and the petitions
filed by Sarna Ram and his alienees were in terms of Section I 0. Further the
evidence on record clearly established that the land in question was the C
personal land of Sama Ram. In a suit filed in the year 1949, there was a
declaration about the absolute ownership of Sarna Ram and that itself was
sufficient to show that the property did not belong to the Sikh Gurdwara and
it had no right, title or interest over the land in question. Stand of the
respondents before the Tribunal, so far as this plea is concerned, was that
the Committee was not a party in this suit, and principle of res judicata was D
not applicable.

Appellants before High Court submitted that suit was filed in the year
1949 which was disposed of in the year 1951. At the point of time the suit
was decided, the Committee was not in existence as for the first time the
application under Section 7 of the Act was filed in the year 1960, publication E
was made in the official· gazette in the year 1974, and the petition was
registered before the Tribunal in the year 1975. Therefore, the binding effect
of this judgment and decree passed long time before, cannot be diluted and
specious plea of the respondents being not party should not have been
accepted by the Tribunal. F
The High Court found that the Tribunal has proceeded on erroneous
premises by holding that the application was a composite one under Sections
8 and I 0 of the Act. The petition was reproduced in extenso, to conclude that
the petition was one under Section I 0, and the artificial bifurcation made by
the Tribunal was not proper. It also noticed that the Tribunal lost sight of the G
fact that Sama Ram was Udasi and the decisions referred to by the Tribunal
were not applicable. Jn fact Exhibits R-1, R-2,.R-3, R-4, R-5 and R-7 are clearly
indicative of the fact that the (kaum of) Chet Ram and Sarna Ram was "Sadh
Bairagi". It was held that the entries do not warrant any presumption that
mere passing from Guru to Chela was indicative of its religious character. H
488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002) SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A There is no allegation much less proof which will prove that the land was
given to the M!lhant for religious and charitable purposes. Reference was
made to decision of the Privy Council in Pandit Parma Nand v. Nihal Chand
and Anr., AIR (1938) PC 1.95), to conclude that there was no presumption
about property being religious property. It further observed· that the two
Lahore decisions on which reliance was placed by the ·Tribunal were factually
B distinguishable. It was held that the observations made in those cases relate
to different factual situations and the Court had no occasion to express any
opinion that a person of the Udasi order cannot acquire private property.

It n0ticed that the judgment of civil court which adjudicated the suit of
C 1949 and disposed it of by judgment dated 31st August, 1951 was relevant
under Section 13 of tbe~~ndian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short 'the Evidence
Act'). With reference to the evidence tendered by the parties by examination
of witnesses, it was concluded that the statements of witnesses examined as
PWs were reliable and cogent and that of RWs was clearly unacceptable. The
factual findings so far as evidence of RWs is concerned, were, inter _alia, as
D follows:

x x x x x x

"The Committee examined two witnesses, namely, R. W. l Bakshi
Singh and R.W.2 Gurdit Singh. They deposed that they had seen the
E disputed premises which is used as a Gurdwara; that people go there
for worship; that incorne from the land is used for langar (free kitchen)
and providing food to the wayfarers and for repair of the Gurdwara
building. They admitted in cross-examination that there was another
Gurdwara in the center of the village and there is no land attached to
that Gurdwara.
F
The oral evidence led by the appellant appears to be credible and
trustworthy. Perusal of the documentary evidence indicates that
predecessor Mahants have been recorded as owner-in-possession of
the agricultural land since 1883-84 A.D. In Ex.R-1, which is copy of
·.~
Jamabandi for the year 1883-84, Chet Ram, Predecessor-in-interest of
G
the appellant, is recorded as owner-in-possession of the land in
dispute. The testimony of the appellant's witnesses finds corroboration
from the documentary evidence referred supra and it lends credence
to the witness' testimony that the disputed agricultural land had
devolved on the appellant from his ancestors. On the other hand, the
H oral evidence led by the committee does not inspire confidence. Their
SHIROMA NI GURDWARA PARBANDHAKCOMM_ v. BAGGASINGH[ARIJITPASA YAT,J.] 489

bold statements receive no corroboration frolR the documentary A
evidence. They could not tell which place in the disputed Dera was
being used as Parkash Asthan. They admitted that for the last 617
months there was no Parkash of Guru Gran th Sahib, but they did not
state whether any Gurparb was celebrated in the institution or that
Guru Granth Sahib was the only mode of worship and it was being B
recited religiously in the institution. Their parrot-like statements are
not reliable."

Resultantly it was observed that there is no escape from the conclusion
that the property mentioned in the Punjab Government Notification dated
4.11.1974 published under sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the Act is the C
private property of Mahant Sarna Ram, and the appeals were allowed.

In support of the appeals, it was contended by the learned counsel for
the appellant that on every count the High Court judgment is erroneous on
application of law and appreciation of evidence. It was submitted that the
effect of notification under Section 9 of the Act and the presumption under D

... Section 18( I )(g) of the Act were lost sight of. The entries showing that Sarna
Ram acquired the property by succession from his Guru as Chela clearly
establis,h that the property was a religious property and no other conclusion
is available. The notification under Section 9(1) was issued on 16.5.1978 and,
therefore, Pait Ill of the Act was applicable and the petition under Section
I 0 was misconceived. Though the maintainability of the petition was not E
specifically raised by the Committee before the Tribunal or the High Court
that being a question of law was available to be urged in these appeals. High
Court erroneously proceeded on the basis that the application was under
Section I 0 of the Act. Conclusion of the Tribunal that it was composite
petition under Sections 8 and I 0 of the Act, and its observations that the p
petition was incompetent, had attained finality. Presumption under Section 44
of the Revenue Act was rebutted in view of what has been stated in Section
18 (I )(g) of the Act. The High Court only referred to Section 13 of the
Evidence Act, but lost sight of Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(in short 'the CPC') dealing with res judicata. Admittedly, the Committee was
not a party in suit, and merely because it was decided in the year 1951, the G
decision in the suit does not operate as res judicata. There was no material
to show that Mahant Sarna Ram belonged to the Udasi order and the High
Court held so on mere presumptions. Two decisions of the Lahore High Court
on which the Tribunal placed reliance are clearly applicable to the facts of the
case, and the High Court was in error by holding the factual position in said H
490 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A cases to be distinguishable.
Respondents supported the judgment and submitted that the conclusions
on law and facts are irreversible. 111 addition to re-iteration of points urged
by them before the High Court it was submitted that requisite conditions for
declaration as Sikh Gurudwara as mandated by Section 16(2) have not been
B established.

In order to appreciate the rival submissions birds eye view of the
pivotal provisions is necessary. They are Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16(2) and
18(1 )(g), and read as follows:-

c Section 7: Petitions to have a gurdwara declared a Sikh Gurdwara-
( l) Any fifty or more Sikh worshippers of a gurdwara, each of whom
is more than twenty-one years of age and was on the commencement
of this Act or, in the case of the extended territories from the
commencement of the Amending Act, resident in the police station
area in which the gurdwara is situated, may forward to the appropriate
D
Secretary to Government so as to reach the Secretary within one year
from the commencement of this Act or within such further period as
the State Government may by notification fix for this purpose, a
petition praying to have the gurdwara declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara:

Provided that the State Government may in respect of any such
E
gurdwara declare by notification that a petition 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,
F and shall thereafter deal with any petition that may be otherwise duly
forwarded in respect of any such gurdwara as if the petition had been
duly forwarded by petitioners who were such residents:

Provided further that no such petition shall be entertained in
respect of any institution specified in schedule I or schedule II unless
G the institution is deemed to be excluded from specification in schedule
I under the provisions of Section 4.

(2) List of property claimed for the gurdwara and of persons in
possession thereof to accompany a petition under sub-section (I) A
petition forwarded under the provisions of sub-section (I) shall state
H the name of the gurdwara to which it relates and of the district, tahsil
SfflROMANI GURDW ARA PARBANDHAKCOMM. v. BAGGA SINGH[ARIJIT PASA YAT, J.] 49 J

and revenue estate in which it is situated, and shall be accompanied A
by a list, verified and. signed by the petitioners, of all rights, titles or
interest in immovable properties situated in Punjab inclusive of the
gurdwara and in all monet~ry endowments yielding recurring income
or profit received in Punjab, which the petitioners claim to belong
within their knowledge to the gurdwara the name of the person in
possession of any such right, title or interest, and if any such person B
is insane or a minor, the name of his legal or natural guardian, or if
there is no such guardian, the name of the persons with whom the
insane person or minor resides or is residing, or if there is no such
person, the name of the person actually or constructively in possession
of such right, title or interest on behalf of the insane person or minor, C
and if any such right, title or interest is alleged to be in possession
of the gurdwara through any person the name of such person shall
be stated in the list; and the petition and the list shall be in such form
and shall contain such further particulars as may be prescribed.

(3) Publication of petition and list received under sub-sections (!) D
and (2)-0n receiving a petition duly signed and forwarded under the
provisions of sub-section (I) the State Government shall as soon as
may be, publish it along with the accompanying list, by notification,
and ;hall cause it and the list to be published, in such manner as may
be prescribed, at the headquarters of the district and of the tahsil and E
in the revenue estate in which the gurdwara is situated, and at the
headquarters of every district and of every tahsil and in every revenue
estate in which any of the immovable properties mentioned in the list
is situated and shall also give such other notice thereof as may be
prescribed:

- Provided that such petition may be withdrawn by notice to be
F
forwarded by the Board so as to reach the appropriate Secretary to
Government at any time before publication, and on such withdrawal,
it shall be deemed as if no petition had been forwarded under the
provisions of sub-section (I).

(4) Notice ofc/aims to property to be sent to persons shown in the
G
list as in possession-The state Government shall also, as soon as may
be, send by registered post a notice of the claim to any right, title or
interest included in the list to each of the persons named therein as
being in possession of such right, title or interest either on his own
behalf or on behalf of an insane person or minor or on behalf of the H
492 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002) SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A gurdwara:

Provided that no such notice need be sent if the person named
as being in possession is a person who joined in forwarding the list.

(5) Effect of publication of petition and list under sub-section (3)-
The publication of a notification under the provisions of sub-section
B
(3) shall be conclusive proof that the provisions of sub-sections (1),
(2), (3) and (4) have been duly complied with.

Section 8: Petition to have it declared that a place asserted to be
a Sikh Gurdwara is not such a gurdwara-When a notification has
c been published under the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 7
in respect of any gurdwara, and hereditary office-holders or any
twenty or more worshippers of the gurdwara, each of whom is more
than twenty-one years of age and was 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, a resident of a police
D station area in which the gurdwara is situated may forward to the
State Government, through the appropriate Secretary to Government
so as to reach the Secretary within ninety days from the date 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
E
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 1st day of November, 1956, as the case
may be, may be restored to office on the grounds that such gurdwara
F is not a Sikh Gurdwara filld 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
G 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, resident 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 respect
of any such gurdwara as if the petition had been duly forwarded by
H
SHIR0~1ANIGURD\VARAPARBANDHAKCOMM. 1·. BAGGASINGl-l[ARIJITPASA YAT,J] 493

petitioners who \Vere such residents. A
Section 9: Effect of 0111ission to present a petilion under section 8~
( 1) If no petition has been presented in accordance \vith the provisions
of Section 8 in respect ofa gurdwara to \Vhich a notification published
under the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 7 relates, the State
Government shall after the expiration of ninety days from the date of B
such notification, publish a notification declaring the gurdwara to be
a Sikh Gurdwara.

(2) Effect of publication of a notification under sub-section (I )-The
publication of a notification under the provisions of sub-section (I)
shall be conclusive proof that the gurdwara is a Sikh Gurdwara, and C
the provisions of Part III shall apply to the gurdwara with effect from
the date of th• publication of the notification.

Section 10: Petition of claim to property including in a list published
under sub-section (3) of Section 7-(1) any person may forward to
the State Government through the appropriate Secretary to Government, D
so as to reach the Secretary wit.hin ninety days from the date of the
publication of a notification under the provisions of sub-section (3)
of Section 7, a petition claiming a right, title or interest in any property
included in the list so published.

(2) Signing and verification of petitions under sub-section-{)) A E
petition forwarded under the provisions of sub-section (I) shall be
signed and verified by the person forwarding it in the manner provided
by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), for the signing and
verification of plaints, and shall specify the nature of the right, title

•.. or interest claimed and the grounds of the claim.

(3) Notification of property not claimed under sub-section (I) and
effect of such notification-The State Government shall, as soon as
F

may be, after the expiry of the period for making a claim under the
provisions of sub-section (1), publish notification, specifying the rights,
titles or interest in any properties in respect of which no such claim G
has been made, and the notification shall be conclusive proof of the
fact that no such claim was made in respect of any right, title or
interest specified in the notification.

Section 14: Tribunal to dispose of petition under sections 5, 6, 8, 10
and 11 (I )-The State Government shall forward to a tribunal all H
494 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A petitions received by it under the provisions of sections 5, 6, 8, I 0 and
. .

11, and the tribunal shall dispose of "such petitions by order in
accordance with the provisions of this Act.

(2) The forwarding of the petitions shall be conclusive proof that the
petitions were received by the State Government .within the time
B prescribed in sections 5, 6, 8, I 0 and 11 as the case may be, and in
the case of a petition forwarded by worshippers of a gurdwara under
the provisions of Section 8, shall ~~ conclusive proof that the
provisions of section 8 with respect to such· worshippers were duly
complied with.

c Section 16(2): If the Tribunal finds that the gurdwara-

(i) was established by, or in memory of any of the Ten Sikh Gurus, or
in commemoration of any incident in the life of any of the Ten Sikh
Gurus and was used for public worship by Sikhs before and at the
time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (I) of
D Section 7; or

(ii) owing to some tradition connected with one of the Ten Sikh Gurus,
was used for public worship predominantly by Sikhs before and at the
time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (I) of
Section 7;.
E
(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
F person and was used for such worship by Sikhs, before and at the
time of the presentation of the petition under sub-section (I) of ....:
Section 7; or

(v) owing to some incident connected with the Sikh religion was used
for such worship by .Sikhs, before and at the time of the presentation
G of the petition under sub-section (I) of Section 7;

the tribunal shall decide that it should be declared to be a Sikh
Gurdwara, and record an order accordingly.

Section 18(J)(g): Presumption in favour of a Notified Sikh Gurdwara
H on proof of certain facts when a claim to property is made by an
SHI ROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMM ,., BAGGA SINGH[ARIJITPASA YAT. J] 495
office-holder-In any proceedings before a Tribunal, if any past or A
present office-holder denies that a right. title, or interest recorded: in
his na1ne or in that of any person through \vho111 claims, in a record
of rights, or in an annual record. prepared in accordance \Vith the
provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 ( 17 of 1887), and
claimed to belong to a Notified Sikh Gurdwara, does so belong, and B
claims such right, title or interest to belong to himself shall,
notwithstanding anything contained in section 44 of the said Act, be
a presumption that such right, title or interest belongs to the gurdwara
upon proof of any of the following facts 'namely

(a) x x x x x x
c
(b) x x x x x x
(c) x x x x x x

(d) x x x x x x

(e) x x x x x x D

(f) x x x x x x

(g) the devolution of the succession to the right, title or interest in
question from an office-holder to the successor-in-office as such on
two or more consecutive occasions. E
Basic issue according to us is whether the High Court had rightly
decided the questions raised before it in the background of Section IO. Copy
of the petition which was extracted by the High Court clearly shows that it
was under Section IO. The petition was reproduced in extenso. Bare reading
thereof shows that it was in terms of Section 10. Sections 8 and IO operate F
in different fields. While Section 8 deals with the nature and character of the
institution, Section 10 deals with adj.udication ofright, title and interest of the
applicant. Section 9 only makes Part III of the Act applicable where a
notification is issued. Said Part deals with management and administration of
the property. Section 9 nowhere bars an application in terms of Section I 0. G
Since they operate in different fields, it cannot be said that an application.
under Section IO was excluded wheri notification under Section 9 was issued
by the Government.

Though it was pleaded that there is no material to show that the Sant
\ Sarna Ram belong to Udasi order, the same is clearly untenable in view of the H
496 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A evidence, more particularly, that of PW I 0, who has stated that Sarna Ram is
the Chela of Chet Ram. The property which Sarna Ram claimed devolved upon
him from his Guru Chet Ram, and they were Udasi Sadhus. In the Jamabandi
records the kaum of Chet Ram and Sant Ram was recorded to be, as noted
above, ''Sadh Bairagi". High Court was not in error in holding that the Sant
B Ram belonged to Udasi order.

At this juncture it will be necessary to take note some of the observations
made by the Privy Council in Pandit Parma Nand's case (supra). That was
a case which related to Udasis. It was observed, inter alia, as follows :-

"The principal ground, upon which the judgment of this High
c Court proceeds, is that the Baghichi and other properties have
descended from guru (religious preceptor) to enable chela (religious
disciple); but this circumstance does not necessarily lead to the
conclusion that a property, when acquired by a mahant, loses its
secular character. It is comm<?n ground that the mahants of this
D Institution belonged to an ascetic order called Udasi. The Udasis
rarely marry; and, if they do so, generally lose all influence; for the
...
dharamsala or Gurdwara soon becomes a private residence closed to
strangers; Maclagants. Census Report for the Punjab, Part 1, Chap. 4,
p.152. When a person enters the Udasi order, he severs his connection
with the members of his natural family. It follows that neither he nor
E his natural relative can succeed to the property held by the other.
There is however no reason for holding that an Udasi cannot acquire
private property with his own money or by his own exertions. If he
does acquire private property, it cannot be inherited by his natural
relatives, but passes on his death to his spiritual heir including his
F chela who is recognized as his spiritual son. The descent of the
property from a guru to his chela does not warrant the presumption .....
that it is religious property. "

(Underlined for emphasis)

G In view of the aforesaid, it is really not necessary to deal in detail with
the plea relating to non-compliance of the stipulations in Section 16(2), except
to take note of two decisions of this Court, rendered by three learned Judges
in each, throwing beacon light on the issue.

In Pritam Dass Mahant v. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak
H Committee, AIR (1984) SC 858, it was held as under:-
SHIROMANIGURDWARAPARBANDHAKCOMM. v. BAGGAS!NGH[ARIJITPASAYAT,J.] 497

x x x x x x A
"Temples are found almost in every religion but there are some
differences between the Sikh temples and those of other religions. The
Sikh Gurdwaras have the following distinctive features:

( 1) Sikh temples are not the place of idol worship as the Hindu B
temples are. There is no place for idol worship in a Gurdwara. The
central object of worship in a Gurdwara is Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the
holy book. The pattern of worship consists of two main items: reading
of the holy hymns followed by their explanation by some learned man,
not necessarily a particular Granthi and then singing of some passages
from the Holy Granth. The former is called Katha and the second is C
called Kirtan. A Sikh thus worships the Holy Words that are written
in the Granth Sahib, the Words or Shaloada about the Eternal Truth
of God. No idol or painting of any Guru can be worshipped.

(2) Sikh worship in the Gurdwara is a congregational worship, D
whereas Hindu temples are meant for individual worship. A Sikh does
the individual worship at home when he recites Gurbani daily. Some
· scriptures meant for this purpose are Japji, Jaap, Rahras, Kirtan Sohila.
Sangat is the collective body of Sikhs who meet every day in the
Gurdwara.
E
(3) Gurdwara is a place where a copy of Guru Granth Sahib is
installed. The unique and distinguishing feature would always be the
Nishan Sahib, a flagstltff with a yellow flag of Sikhism flying from it.
This serves as a symbol of the Sikh presence. It enables the travellers,
whether they be Sikhs or not, to know where hospitality is available.
There may be complexity of rooms in a Gurdwara for the building may F
also serve as a school, or where children are taught the rudiments of
Sikhism as well as a rest center for travellers. Often there will be a
kitchen where food can be prepared though langar itself might take
place in the yawning. Sometimes the Gurdwara will also be used as
a clinic. But its pivotal point is the place of worship and the main room G
will be that in which the Guru Granth Sahib is installed where the
community gathers for diwan. The focal point in this room will be the
book itself."

The sine qua non for an institution, to be treated as Sikh Gurdwara as
observed in the said case, is that there should be established Guru Granth H
498 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002) SUJ>P. 4 s.c.R.

A Sahib, and the worship of the same by congregation, and a Nishan Sahib.
There may be other rooms of the institution made for other purposes but the
crucial test is the existence of Guru Granth Sahib and the worshippers thereof
by the congregation and Nishan Sahib.

Unless the claim falls within one or the other of the categories
B enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 16, the institution cannot be declared
to be a Sikh Gurdwara.

In Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee Amritsar v. Mahant
Kirpa Ram and Ors., AIR (1984) SC 1059, it was observed that Udasis form
an independent sect. They do venerate Sikh scriptures. Therefore, in an
C institution of Udasis sect, one can visualize reading of Granth Sahib or
veneration of Sikh scriptures. That itself is not decisive of the character of
the institution. On the contrary, where the succession was from Guru to Chela
and those Gurus were followers of Udasis faith and the institution was known
as Dera of Udasi Bhekh and they followed some of the practices of Hindu
D traditional religion, such things were completely destructive of the character
of the institution as Sikh Gurdwara. .-

Above. being the factual position and the legal principles applicable
thereto, bte appeals deserve dismissal, which we direct.

E K.K.T. Appeals dismissed.