THE BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR.versusVISHWANATH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS.

                                                                                        {

A         THE BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ANR.
                                 v.
                  VISHWANA TH PRASAD LOHIA & ORS.

                                SEPTEMBER 14, 2007

B                  IS.B.SINHAANDHARJITSINGHBEDI,JJ.J


          Bihar State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950-Section 29(2)-
    Notification under-Issuance of-Quashed b)l High Court holding that
C   Notification not in terms of s 29(2) and civil suit involving same question
    pending trial-On appeal, held: Finding of High Court correct that there
    was no evidence to show that the notices had been served under s. 29(2)-
    Civil suit with regard to similar issue pending in Civil Court, Thus, appeals
    dismissed but status-quo as existing to continue till final disposal of pending
    matter.
D
          Notification was issued under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Bihar
 ., State Board Religious Trust Act, 1950 whereby the committee was com:tituted
    on the basis of the trust deed. High Court held that the Notification was not
    in terms ofsection.29(2); that scheme under section 32 was not in accordance
    with law; and that the civil suit involving same question was pending trial,
E and quashed the Notification. Hence these appeals.
          Disposing of the appeals, the Court

          HELD: 1. The notice given to the committee proposing supersession is
    a composite one under section 29(2) and section 32 of the Bihar State Board
F   Religious Trust Act, 1950. The finding of the High Court that there was no
    evidence to show that the notices had been served under section 29(2) cannot
    be seriously challenged. The Civil Suit with regard to the validity of the trust
    is pending in the Civil Court. It is directed that the status quo as exists today
    would continue till the disposal of the matters. !Para 31 [956-A, BJ
G         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5880 of2000.

          From the Judgment and Order dated 27.09.1991 of the High Court of
    Judicature at Patna in C.W.J.C. No. 3510of1991.


H                                         954
       BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS v. V.P. LOHIA [H.S. BED!, J.] 955

                                            WITH                                        A
          C.A. No. 5879 of2000.

           K.B. Rohtagi, Aparna Rohtagi and S.K. Dhingra for the Appellant.

          H.L. Agrawal, Irshad Ahmad and Laksmi Raman Singh for the                     B
     Respondents.

           The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

           HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Bihar
     State Board of Religious Trusts etc. impugning the judgment of the Division        C
     Bench of the Patna High Court dated 27.9.1991 quashing the Notification
     dated 5.8.1989 issued under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Bihar State
     Board Religious Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter called the "Act") whereby the
     committee said to have been constituted on the basis of the trust deed dated
     26.9.1983.
                                                                                        D
            2. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants herein
,•   that the requisite notice under sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Act had
     been issued to the committee prior to its supersession and as such the
      impugned judgment holding to the contrary was not correct. We however find
     that the notice given to the committee proposing supersession is a composite       E
     one under section 29(2) and section 32 of the Act. The High Court has found
     that the said Notification (Annexure-3) dated 5th August 1989 was not in
     accordance with the provisions or in terms of section 29 of the Act and did
     not also meet the parameters of the scheme which have been formulated later
     under section 32. It had also come during the course of the hearing before
     the High Court that Civil Suit No. 207/1986 seeking a declaration, inter-alia,     F
     that the trust deed dated 26th September 1983 was a void document as well
     as several other issues was pending trial. The Division Bench opine_d that as
     the matter was sub-judice before the Civil Court it would not be necessary
     or appropriate to go into the questions raised before the Civil Court but in
     so far as the aforesaid Notification was concerned it having been issued
     under section 29(2) of the Act without giving a proper hearing to the committee    G
     and the scheme under section 32 of the Act being not in accordance with law
     was liable to be quashed. It is in this situation, the present appeals have been
     filed by the Board.

           3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through        H
    956                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2007] 9 S.C.R.

A the record and in particular the notices allegedly given to the committee
    before its supersession as also the scheme framed under section 32 of the
    Act. We note the finding of the High Court that there was no evidence to
    show that the notices had been served under section ~9(2) cannot be seriously
    challenged. We also find that Civil Suit with regard to the validity of' the trust
B   is pending in the Civil Court. We accordingly dismiss the appeals but while
    doing so direct that the status quo as exists today will continue till the
    disposal of the appeals. We also direct that a fresh show cause notice under
    section 29(2) will be given to the committee and both parties will be at liberty
    to produce their documents before the Board within four months from the
    date of the service of the notice and that status-quo as exists today will
C   continue to operate till the final disposal of the matter by the Board in
    proceedings under section 29(2) of the Act.

          4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly

          5. Civil Appeal No. 5879/2000 is disposed of in tenns of the judgment
D   in Civil Appeal No. 5880/2000.

    NJ.                                                       Appeals disposed of.