IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6975 of 2023

======================================================

Deonandan Das @ Dilip Das, Chela of Late Mahant Hari Das, Resident of

Siddhasharam @ Siddha Baba ki Badi Kutiya, Mohalla Laxmana nagar, Kot

Bazaar, Sitamarhi, P.S. and Dist. Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts, Vidyapati Marg, Patna through its

President.

2.The President, Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts, Vidyapati Marg, Patna

3.The Superintendent, Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts, Vidyapati Marg,

Patna

4.The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi.

5.The Circle Officer, Sitamarhi.

6.The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department,

Government of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondents: Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Sr. Advocate

Mr. Ritik Shah, Advocate

Mr. Madan Mohan, Advocate

For the State : Mr. Raj Kishore Roy ( GP- 18 )

Ms. Surekha Kumari, AC to GP-18

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 11-12-2023

Heard Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Ganpati Trivedi,

learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Ritik Shah, learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Board and Mr.

Raj Kishore Roy, learned GP-18 for the State.

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

2/18

2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition for

following relief(s) in paragraph no. 1, which inter alia is

reproduced hereinafter:-

“a. For grant of an appropriate writ for quashing

the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the President, Bihar

State Board of Religious Trusts appointing the Circle

Officer, Sitamarhi as temporary trustee of Siddhashram @

Siddh Baba Ki Badi Kutiya under Section 33 of Bihar

Hindu Religious Trusts Act (Act for short) for protection of

the temple and the land of Siddhasharam and further

directing the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi to collect

rental, etc. from the persons running coaching center, etc. in

the premises of Siddhasharam and to spend the same for

puja paath, etc. in the Aashram till appointment of a trustee

or formation of a trust committee and directing the

petitioner not to obstruct in such functioning of the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi (Annexure-7).

b. For grant of an appropriate writ for quashing

letter no. 4051 dated 28.02.2023 issued under the signature

of Incharge Assistant Superintendent, Bihar State Board of

Religious Trusts directing the petitioner and others not to

interfare in the functioning of Sub-Divisional Officer,

Sitamarhi in management of the trust in question

(Annexure-8).

c. For grant of an appropriate writ for a direction to the

respondents to desist from interfering with the functioning

of the affairs of Siddhashram by the petitioner as its

Mahant.”

3. Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that nature of

dispute is civil in nature and the Board has no jurisdiction to

declare the title over the property, which was transferred in the

name of the Guru of the petitioner namely, Siyaram Das @

Siddha Baba, long back by one ex-malik Nawab Sharafat Ali

Hussain Khan by a registered gift, and the affairs of the temple

is being carried out by the shebait of the temple, where they

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

3/18

perform puja of idol of ‘Lord Ram Janki’.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that the Circle

Officer, Dumra created the jamabandi of CSP No. 918 and 919

in the name of Hari Das on 24.03.1969. Mithila Sharan

appointed his chela Hari Das as ‘Malik Mustakil’ through a

registered deed dated 17.03.1972 on 17.03.1972. During

Revisional Survey Operation, RSP No. 164, 165 and 166 were

carved out from CSP No. 918 and 919 and the same were

recorded in possession of Hari Das. Hari Das has been paying

rent for the land to the State of Bihar.

5. He further submitted that Hari Das appointed his

Chela Deonandan Das @ Dilip Das (petitioner) as the Mahant

of the Aashram and he was given ‘Chaadar Pagdi’ as per

Ramanandi Vaishnav Parampara on 07.08.2015. Mahant Hari

Das had executed a deed of ‘Sabaitnama’ in favour of

Deonandan Das with respect to Siddhashram Temple giving him

all ‘Maalikana Haque’ on 18.02.2019. Mahant Hari Das was

killed on 23.02.2021. The In-charge Assistant Superintendent of

Bihar Board of Religious Trusts (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Board’) issued letter to the petitioner to appear before the Board

and to put his case relating to encroachment upon the land of

Siddhashram on 02.05.2022. The Board called for a report

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

4/18

regarding management of the temple, etc. The Inspector of the

Board had submitted his report on 05.12.2022. The President of

the Board appointed the Circle Officer, Dumra as temporary

trustee of the temple and directed the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Sitamarhi to collect rental, etc. from the persons running

coaching centres, etc. in the premises of Siddhashram and to

spend the same in puja, paath, etc. of the temple on 05.12.2022.

The In-charge Assistant Superintendent of the Board directed

the petitioner not to obstruct in the functioning of the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi in the matter of management of

the temple on 28.02.2023. On these grounds, learned counsel

submitted that the orders dated 05.12.2022 and 28.02.2023 are

without jurisdiction.

6. Per contra, Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, learned senior

counsel appearing on behalf of the Board submitted that

petitioner claims to be the Sabait of the Sidha Ashram Religious

Trust Committee. He informs that the Trust had earlier filed

CWJC No. 91 of 2003 through its secretary had sought removal

of Hari Narayan Das and Dev Nandan Das @ Dilip Kumar from

illegal occupation in the premises of Shri Sidha Ashram Trust

Committee. The said Dev Nandan Das @ Dilip Kumar is the

petitioner in the present writ petition. The said writ petition was

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

5/18

remanded back to the Board with a direction for legal and

proper constitution of the Trust Committee by appointing

secretary and its members. The president has appointed the

Committee and there is no infirmity in the order dated

05.12.2022.

7. He further submitted that under the Bihar

Religious Trust Board Act the constitution of the Committee and

appointment of the secretary and members is to be made by the

Board and the Board has appointed the Circle Officer,

Sitamarhi, as temporary trustee and has directed the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi to collect rental etc. from the

persons running coaching center, etc. in the premises of

Siddhasharam and to spend the same for puja paath, etc. in the

Aashram till appointment of a trustee or formation of a trust

committee and directing the petitioner not to obstruct in such

functioning of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi.

8. Heard the parties.

9. In the present case, the petitioner has claimed his

title on the basis of a piece of land apertaining to CSP Plot no.

918 and 919 gifted by ex-malik Nawab Sharafat Ali Hussain

Khan and others, and, thereafter, the same land was vested in

name of Siya ram Das @ Siddha Baba, a Hindu sant, who had

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

6/18

installed idols of Sri Ram Janki Ji and other deities in his

Ashram/Temple, which was called Siddhashram @ Siddha Baba

ki Badi Kutiya. The total area measures 0.83 acres and the same

was in name of Hari Das, Chela of Mahant Mithila Sharan Das,

who used to perform Puja and look after the affairs of

Siddhashram. The petitioner has claimed that he being the

Mahanth has been paying rent on behalf of the Siddhashram.

10. The Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, 1950

confers the power of general superintendence of all Hindu

religious trusts in the State in the Board. A religious trust is

defined under Section 2(l) of the Act, which is reproduced

hereinunder:-

“2(l) "Religious trust" means [and shall be

deemed always to mean] any express or constructive trust

created or existing for any purpose recognised by Hindu Law to

be religious, pious or charitable, but shall not include a trust

created according to the Sikh religion or purely for the benefit of

the Sikh community and a private endowment created for the

worship of a family idol in which public are not interested [and

where public offerings and donations are not received]

”

(Emphasis supplied)

11. Section 28 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust

Act, 1950 which provides for general power and duties of the

Board is reproduced hereinafter:

“28. General powers and duties of the Board. - (1)

The general superintendence of all religious trusts in the

State shall be vested in the Board.The Board shall do all

things reasonable and necessary to ensure that such trusts

are properly supervised and administered and that the

income thereof is duly appropriated and applied to the

objects of such trusts and in accordance with the purposes

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

7/18

for which such trusts were founded or for which they exist,

so far as the objects and purposes can be ascertained.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the

provisions of sub-section (1), and subject to the other

provisions of this Act, the powers and duties of the Board

shall be-

(a) to prepare and maintain in the prescribed

manner a complete record containing full information

relating to the origin, nature, extent, income (if any),

objects and beneficiaries of the different classes of religious

trusts in the State of Bihar;

(b) to prepare and maintain a register containing

true copies of all documents creating any religious trust;

(c) to prepare and settle its budget and to furnish a

copy thereof to the State Government or to such authority

as the State Government may direct;

(d) to take measures for the recovery of lost property

of any religious trust;

(e) to cause inspection to be made of the property

and the office of any religious trust including accounts and

to authorise the Superintendent or any of its members,

officers or servant for that purpose;

(f) from time to time, to call for information, reports,

return and other documents from trustees;

(g) to give directions for the proper administration

of a religious trust in accordance with the law governing

such trust and the wishes of the founder in so far as such

wishes can be ascertained and are not repugnant to such

law;

(h) to remove a trustee from his office if such

trustee-

(i) is convicted of any such offence or is subjected

by a Criminal Court to any such order as implies moral

turpitude which in the opinion of the Board, unfits him to

hold office;

(ii) is convicted more than once of the same or

different offences under this Act;

(iii) refuses to act, or willfully disobeys the

directions and orders of the Board under this Act; or

(iv) applies for being adjudged or is adjudged an

insolvent:

[(v) makes persistent defaults in the submission of

budgets,accounts, reports or returns or in payment of

contributions or other dues payable to the Board.

(vi) alienates immovable property of the trust in

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

8/18

contravention of this Act or misappropriates funds of the

trust.

(vii) indulges in immoral act disapproved by

Dharmashashtras or has violated "maryada" of the

"sampradaya" to which he belongs.]

(i) to direct the deposit of the endowment money of a

religious trust in the hands of a trustee in any bank

approved by the State Government;

(j) to sanction on the application of a trustee or any

other person interested in a religious trust, the conversion

of any property of such trust into another property, if the

Board is satisfied that such conversion is beneficial for the

said trust:

Provided that no such conversion shall be

sanctioned unless the Board so resolves by majority which

includes at least three fourth of its members and resolution

of the Board is approved by the District Judge;

(k) to control and administer the Trust Fund subject

to the general supervision of the State Government;

(l) to keep true and regular accounts of its own

receipts and disbursements and submit the same for audit;

(m) to furnish to the State Government or to such

officer as the State Government may appoint in this behalf

any statement, report, return or other documents and any

information which the State Government or, as the case may

be, such officer may require to be furnished and also to

furnish to the State Government an annual report giving a

detailed account of the activities of the Board:

(n) to institute, whenever it thinks fit, an inquiry

relating to the administration of a religious trust;

(o) to direct the trustee of a religious trust to

institute in a court of law, within such time as may be fixed

by the Board, any suit or proceeding which he is entitled to

institute in accordance with the law for the time being in

force in respect of the trust or any matter connected

therewith and on failure of the trustee to do so, institute

such suit or proceeding itself;

(p) to defend either on behalf of or in addition to the

trustee any suit or proceeding instituted with respect to

religious trust or any matter connected therewith, or in

cases where there is no trustee or the succession to the

office of the trustee is disputed, to defend any such suit or

proceeding itself;

(q) to direct the trustee of a religious trust to apply

to the appropriate officer or authority to enter in a record

of rights or municipal records, if any, the right, title or

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

9/18

interest of such trust in any immovable property and, on

failure of the trustee to do so within a reasonable time, to

make such application itself;

(r) to realise, in the prescribed manner and subject

to the prescribed conditions, out of the income of any

religious trust, the cost incurred by the Board in any suit or

proceeding instituted by it under clause (o), in defending

any suit or proceeding under clause (p) or in making and

prosecuting any application under clause (q) in respect of

such trust;

(s) to permit a trustee to retire from his office and, in

case the trustee has power to appoint his successor, to

permit him to make the appointment in his life time; and [to

appoint trustees in vacancies created by the removal under

Section 28(2)(h) subject to the wishes of the founder or to a

mutual compromise between the Board and the Trust

approved by any competent court.]

(t) to extend, for sufficient reason the time within

which any act or thing is required or ordered to be done

before the Board under any of the provision of this Act.

[(u) to decide all disputes whether any trust is a

public or a private trust in accordance with the definition

under Section 2(1) of this Act and the decision of the Board

shall remain in force until it is set aside by a competent

court.]

[(3) Before passing an order under clause (h) of

sub-section (2) the Board shall issue a notice to the trustee

communicating to him the ground of his proposed removal

and provide him a reasonable time for the reply. Before

making an order the Board shall consider the reply, if

submitted with the required time and in case of the removal

under Section 28(2)(h)(vii), shall obtain the opinion of a

Dharmacharya who is well-versed with the tenets of that

particular Sect. After the order of the removal is received by

the trustee, he may, within ninety days of the

communication of such order, apply to the District Judge

for varying, modifying or setting aside the order.]”

(emphasis supplied)

12. Section 39 of the Act provides that the powers

and duties under the Act can be delegated in favouur of the

President. It is reproduced herein below:

“39. Delegation of powers of Board. - The

Board may delegate any of its powers and duties under this Act

to the President to be exercised and performed in such special

circumstances as the Board may specify, and may likewise

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

10/18

withdraw any such delegation.”

13. Section 43B of the Bihar Hindu Religious

Trusts Act, 1950 is reproduced hereinafter:

“43B. Decision of property disputes. - The Tribunal

shall decide the following property disputes-

(i) whether any immovable property is or is not a

property of a particular trust.

(ii) whether any particular property claimed by the

Mahanth, Shebait, priest or a trustee is his personal

property or the property of the temple or math.

Explanations.-(a) If any Mahanth, Shebait, priest or

trustee claims a particular property to be his personal

property, the onus will be on him to prove as to how he

acquired the property and whether he intimated the

concerned authorities after acquiring such property.

(b) All immovable properties of any Pauranic

Mandir or Math which has been regarded sacred for

Centuries or of a gaddi (seat) of a particular sect which has

been in existence for generations will be the property of that

pauranic mandir/math or of that sect, even when mutated in

the name of any trustee unless it is proved that he acquired

it through disclosed source of his personal income.”

14. The Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, 1950 is a

code in itself, however, from the perusal of the provision

contained in Section 28 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act,

1950 it appears that nowhere power is assigned to the Board to

determine the title of a person, body or trust.

15. Section 39, which provides that powers and

duties under the Act can be delegated bin favour of the President

to be executed and performed in such special circumstances

when such powers are conferred upon the President of the Board

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

11/18

then special reasons must come out for delegation of such

powers. If every power is to be delegated in favour of the

Chairman then there is no necessity of constituting a Board. The

constitution of the Board presupposes that ordinarily the work

shall be done and business would be discussed in the Board

meeting and the Board shall not be sub-ordinate to or under the

management of the Chairman of the Trust Board.

16. By virtue of Section 43B of the Act, the

Tribunal has been empowered to decide matters of property

dispute. The admitted facts are that the Trust Shree Sidha

Asharam Religious Trust Committee had earlier filed Cr.WJC

No. 91 of 2003. The same was filed through the Chairman of the

Trust constituted by the Bihar Religious Trust Board with a

prayer to remove respondent no. 10 (Hari Narayan Das @ Hari

Prasad ) and respondent no. 11 (Dev Nandan Das @ Dilip

Kumar) from illegal occupation in the premises of Shri Sidha

Asharam Trust Committee. This Court has observed that in a

case reported in 2003(4) PLJR 710 (Mahanth Vijay Das v. the

State of Bihar and Ors.) , the Bihar Religious Trust Board Act

provides for constitution of the Committee and appointment of

Secretary and members is to be made by the Board and not by

the Chairman or President and the matter was remanded back to

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

12/18

the Bihar Religious Trust Board for constituting the Committee,

as well as, appointment of Secretary and members of the

committee. In the present case, it appears that in spite of the

specific direction of this Court and the law laid down in

Mahanth Vijay Das (supra), the President appointed the Circle

Officer as temporary trustee and directed the Sub-Divisional

Officer, Sitamarhi to collect rent etc. from person running the

coaching institute and the same is reflected from the order dated

05.12.2022 (Annexure-7), which only bears the signature of

president and not other members of the Board. The Paragraph

no. 12 of the order of Mahanth Vijay Das (supra) is reproduced

hereinafter:

“12. Section 39 provides that the powers and

duties under the Act can be delegated in favour of the President

to be exercised and performed in such special circumstances

when such powers are conferred upon the President of the Board

then special reasons must come out for delegation of such

powers. Just for the sake of shirking the responsibility or just to

avoid the work or not to sit in the meeting the Board members

can not delegate their powers in favour of the President. After

all, they are members of the Board and have been so appointed to

take care of the Trust and Trust Board. If every power is to be

delegated in favour of the Chairman then there is no necessity of

constituting a Board. The constitution of the Board presupposes

that ordinarily the work shall be done and business would be

discussed in the Board meeting and the Board shall not be sub-

ordinate to or under the management of the Chairman of the

Trust Board. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section

83 of the Act, the State Board of Religious Trust Bihar has made

bye laws, which were previously published and duly approved by

the State Government.”

17. In accordance with the provision of Sub-

Section L of Section 2 of the Act, the Board has jurisdiction

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

13/18

over the Hindu Religious Trust. The Board under Section 28 and

the Tribunal under Section 43 B of the Act assumed jurisdiction

over the property of the Ram Janki, who is the owner of the

property after the lands were recorded in the name of the

Mahanth by operation of law and the said legal position cannot

be washed away by the Board. The Board, erroneously assumed

its jurisdiction to decide the title of the property of the deity and

proceeded to issue notice without first discussing the

jurisdictional facts.

18. On perusal of the definition of Religious Trust

as provided in Section 2(l) , an inference can be drawn that the

provisions of the Act does not provide for its application to a

private endowment, created for the worship of a family idol, in

which public are not interested and where public offerings and

donations are not received. The order of President of the Board

dated 05.12.2022 (Annexure-7), does not record any findings as

to whether the trust is a public trust or a private one. It merely

makes observations pertaining to alleged encroachment by the

petitioner and takes note of the tenure of the Trust Committee

which ended long ago. Based on these considerations, President

proceeded to appoint a temporary trustee, even before any

determination as to the nature of the trust,which is a vital aspect

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

14/18

in the matter, could be made. The hasty action is reflective of

the callousness of the President in assuming jurisdiction. Even

the provisons of Bye law 43 Clause ‘S’, which authorises the

President to appoint a temporary trustee cannot come to aid of

the President of the Board in the present case. According to the

scheme of the Act, a temporary trustee is to be appointed if there

is a vacancy. If there is no vacancy, no trustee can be appointed.

In the present matter, the President of the Board, has found that

allegedly the petitioner is an encroacher and the Trust

Committee’s tenure had ended already. Under Section 33 of the

Act, the Circle Officer was made temporary trustee for the

safety of the said temple and its land. In his zeal to pass the

order against the petitioner and remove him, the President of the

Board has over stepped his jurisdiction, and has exercised

powers which are not vested in him nor delegated in his favour.

19. An erroneous decision in respect of a matter

which falls within the authority of the Tribunal would not entitle

a writ applicant for a writ of certiorari. However, if the decision

relates to anything collateral to the merit, an erroneous decision

upon which, would affect its jurisdiction, a writ of certiorari

would lie. The scope of writ of certiorari came in for an

elaborate consideration by Apex Court in T.C. Basappa v. T.

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

15/18

Nagappa reported in AIR 1954 SC 440. Therein, the Apex

Court, inter alia, held as follows:

“9. Certiorari may lie and is generally granted when

a court has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction. The

want of jurisdiction may arise from the nature of the subject-

matter of the proceeding or from the absence of some preliminary

proceeding or the court itself may not be legally constituted or

suffer from certain disability by reason of extraneous

circumstances [Vide Halsbury, 2nd Edn., Vol. IX, p. 880].

When thejurisdiction of the court depends upon

theexistence of some collateral fact, it is well settled that the

court cannot by a wrong decision of the fact give it jurisdiction

which it would not otherwise possess [ Vide Banbury v. Fuller, 9

Exch. 111; R v. Income Tax Special Purposes Commissioners, 21

QBD 313].

10. A tribunal may be competent to enter upon an enquiry but in

making the enquiry it may act in flagrant disregard of the rules of

procedure or where no particular procedure is prescribed, it may

violate the principles of natural justice. A writ of certiorari may

be available in such cases. An error in the decision or

determination itself may also be amenable to a writ of certiorari

but it must be a manifest error apparent on the face of the

proceedings, e.g. when it is based on clear ignorance or

disregard of the provisions of law. …”(Emphasis supplied)

20. In Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Ahmed Ishaque &

Ors. reported in AIR 1955 SC 233, the Apex Court held:

“21. … On these authorities, the following

propositions may be taken as established: (1) Certiorari

will be issued for correcting errors of jurisdiction, as

when an inferior Court or Tribunal acts without

jurisdiction or in excess of it, or fails to exercise it. (2)

Certiorari will also be issued when the court or Tribunal

acts illegally in the exercise of its undoubted jurisdiction,

as when it decides without giving an opportunity to the

parties to be heard, or violates the principles of natural

justice. (3) The court issuing a writ of certiorari acts in

exercise of a supervisory and not appellate jurisdiction.

One consequence of this is that the court will not review

findings of fact reached by the inferior court or tribunal,

even if they be erroneous. This is on the principle that a

court which has jurisdiction over a subject-matter has

jurisdiction to decide wrong as well as right, and when

the legislature does not choose to confer a right of

appeal against that decision, it would be defeating its

purpose and policy, if a superior court were to rehear the

case on the evidence, and substitute its own findings in

certiorari. These propositions are well-settled and are

not in dispute.

xxx xxx xxx

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

16/18

23. It may therefore be taken as settled that a

writ of certiorari could be issued to correct an

error of law. But it is essential that it should be

something more than a mere error; it must be

one which must be manifest on the face of the

record. … The fact is that what is an error

apparent on the face of the record cannot be

defined precisely or exhaustively, there being an

element of indefiniteness inherent in its very

nature, and it must be left to be determined

judicially on the facts of each case.”

(Emphasis supplied)

21. I do not find that the Religious Trust Board or

the Tribunal has any jurisdiction to interfere with the affairs of a

private property. In case they have any interest, they may avail

remedy before the competent Civil Court.

22. Since the several disputed questions of fact has

been raised since year 2001, this Court is not in a position to

adjudicate in the manner and to hold that President of the

Religious Trust Board has any jurisdiction to interfere with the

affairs of the temple.

23. We may advert to the decision of the the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of General Manager,

Electrical Rengali Hydro Electric Project, Orissa And Others

v. Sri Giridhari Sahu And Others , Civil Appeal No. 8071 Of

2010, wherein, in paragraph no. 29, the Court observed:

“ 29. .... Once a decision is rendered by a body amenable

to Certiorari jurisdiction, certiorari could be issued

when a jurisdictional error is clearly established. The

jurisdictional error may be from failure to observe the

limits of its jurisdiction. It may arise from the procedure

adopted by the body after validly assuming jurisdiction.

It may act in violation of principles of natural justice.

The body whose decision which comes under attack may

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

17/18

decide a collateral fact which is also a jurisdictional fact

and assume jurisdiction. Such a finding of fact is not

immune from being interfered with by a Writ of

Certiorari. As far as the finding of fact which is one

within the jurisdiction of the court, it is

ordinarily a matter ‘off bounds’ for the writ court.

..... An error of law which becomes vulnerable to judicial

scrutiny by way of Certiorari must also one which is

apparent on the face of the record. As held by this Court

in Hari Vishnu Kamath (supra), as to what constitutes an

error apparent on the face of the record, is a matter to be

decided by the court on the facts of each case. A finding

of fact which is not supported by any evidence would be

perverse and in fact would constitute an error of law

enabling the writ court to interfere. It is also to be

noticed that if the overwhelming weight of the evidence

does not support the finding, it would render the decision

amendable to certiorari jurisdiction. This would be the

same as a finding which is wholly unwarranted by the

evidence which is what this Court has laid down [See

M/s. Perry and Co. Ltd (supra)].”

24. The Bye-law 43 Clauses R refers to settling of

schemes for proper administration of Religious Trust but do not

provide to the President of the Board with the powers to remove

the trustee. If such powers have not been delegated in favour of

the President. Clause S authorises the Chairman to appoint a

temporary trustee. A temporary trustee, according to the scheme

of the Act can be appointed if there is a vacancy. The allegation

is that the petitioner had committed fraud and encroached the

property and had been negligent in giving proper amount and on

these foundation, he has restrained the writ petitioner from

interfering with the affairs of the Mandir/ Trust. The order of

restraining the petitioner cannot be allowed to stand and

accordingly, the constitution of Committee also cannot be

Patna High Court CWJC No.6975 of 2023 dt.11-12-2023

18/18

sustained, being without jurisdiction.

25. Accordingly, the order dated 05.12.2023 and

letter no. 4051 dated 28.02.2023 are hereby quashed and set

aside.

26. In light of above observations and discussions,

the present writ petition is allowed.

27. There shall be no order as to cost.

Niraj/-

(Purnendu Singh, J)

AFR/NAFR A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A

Uploading Date 20.12.2023

Transmission Date N/A