http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 3350-54 of 1993

PETITIONER:

Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar

RESPONDENT:

Bagga Singh and Ors.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/12/2002

BENCH:

SHIVARAJ V. PATIL & ARIJIT PASAYAT.

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT

ARIJIT PASAYAT, 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.

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 District Bhatinda filed a petition under sub-section (1)

of Section 7 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (in short 'the Act') to the

appropriate 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, titles and interests belonging to the Gurdwara in

question vide notification in the Punjab Government Gazette dated

4.11.1974 One Mahant 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 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 (1)

of Section 14 of the Act. Tribunal treated the petition to be a 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 they claim to be worshippers or hereditary

office-holders of the institution and their petition was similarly not

maintainable. However, the Tribunal proceeded to deal with the petition

under Section 10. It is to be noted that the Tribunal registered the petitions

as No. 663/1975 (Bagga Singh and another v. S.G.P.C. Amritsar) filed by

Sarna Ram and No.654/1975 (Ramji Dass and others v. S.G.P.C. Amritsar)

filed by Ramji Das and others. The petitions under Section 10 of the Act

were registered giving identical numbers. Vide its order dated 31.7.1978 the

Tribunal held that the building in question was a Gurdwara and the land

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 10

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

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 suits 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 from aforesaid late Mahant Sarna Ram and these were registered as

suits No. 89 and 90 of 1979 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 of 1980.

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 others v. Mahant Narain Dass and

others (AIR 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

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 Chela, the presumption under Section 18(1)(g)

arises. It was further held that presumption attached to the entries in the

Jamabandi under Section 44 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 ( in

short 'Revenue Act') is rebutted by the presumption under Section 18(1)(g)

of the Act. Dismissing Sarna Ram's petition it was held that he had no right,

title or interest in the land which belonged to the Gurdwara. As a

consequence, other applications filed by Ramji Dass and others were not

entertainable 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

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 10 are entirely different and the

petitions filed by Sarna Ram and his alienees were in terms of Section 10.

Further the evidence on record clearly established that the land in question

was the personal land of Sarna 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 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

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.

The High Court found that the Tribunal has proceeded on erroneous

premises by holding that the application was a composite one under Sections

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 10

8 and 10 of the Act. The petition was reproduced in extenso, to conclude that

the petition was one under Section 10, and the artificial bifurcation made by

the Tribunal was not proper. It also noticed that the Tribunal lost sight of

the fact that Sarna Ram was Udasi and the decisions referred to by the

Tribunal were not applicable. In 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. There is no allegation much less proof which will prove

that the land was given to the Mahant for religious and charitable purposes.

Reference was made to decision of the Privy Council in Pandit Parma Nand

v. Nihal Chand and another (AIR 1938 PC 195), 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 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 noticed that the judgment of civil court which adjudicated the suit of

1949 and disposed it of by judgment dated 31st August, 1951 was relevant

under Section 13 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1882 (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 follows:

x x x x x x

"The Committee examined two witnesses, namely,

R.W.1 Bakshi Singh and R.W.2 Gurdit Singh. They

deposed that they had seen the disputed premises which

is used as a Gurdwara; that people go there for worship;

that income from the land is used for langar (free

kitchen) and providing food to the wayfarers and for

repaid 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.

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 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 oral evidence led by

the committee does not inspire confidence. Their bold

statements receive no corroboration from the

documentary evidence. They could not tell which place

in the disputed Dera was being used as Parkash Asthan.

They admitted that for the last 6/7 months there was no

Parkash of Guru Granth 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 recited religiously in the institution.

Their parrot-like statements are not reliable."

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 10

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 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

Section 18(1)(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 establish 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, Part III of the Act was applicable and the petition

under Section 10 was misconceived. Though the maintainability of the

petition was not 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 10 of the Act. Conclusion of the Tribunal that

it was composite petition under Sections 8 and 10 of the Act, and its

observations that the 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 (1)(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 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 cases to

be distinguishable.

Respondents supported the judgment and submitted that the

conclusions on law and facts are irreversible. In 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 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:-

Section 7: Petitions to have a gurdwara declared a Sikh

Gurdwara- (1) 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 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 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

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 10

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 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 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 (1) A petition forwarded under the

provisions of sub-section (1) shall state the name of the

gurdwara to which it relates and of the district, tahsil and

revenue estate in which it is situated, and shall be

accompanied 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 monetary 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 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,

of 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, 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 (1) and (2)- On receiving a petition duly signed

and forwarded under the provisions of sub-section (1) the

State Government shall as soon as may be, publish it

along with the accompanying list, by notification, and

shall 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 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 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 (1).

(4) Notice of claims to property to be sent to persons

shown in the 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

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 10

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 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 (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 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

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 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 Ist 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, 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 petitioners who were such residents.

Section 9: Effect of omission to present a petition under

section 8- (1) If no petition has been presented in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 in respect of

a gurdwara to which 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 such notification, publish a

notification declaring the gurdwara to be a Sikh

Gurdwara.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 10

(2) Effect of publication of a notification under sub-

section (1)- The publication of a notification under the

provisions of sub-section (1) shall be conclusive proof

that the gurdwara is a Sikh Gurdwara, and the provisions

of Part III shall apply to the gurdwara with effect from

the date of the 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, so as to reach the

Secretary within 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 (1) A petition forwarded under the provisions of

sub-section (1) 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 (1) and effect of such notification The State

Government shall, as soon as 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 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 (1) The State Government shall

forward to a tribunal all petitions received by it under the

provisions of sections 5, 6, 8, 10 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 prescribed in sections 5, 6,

8, 10 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 be conclusive proof that

the provisions of section 8 with respect to such

worshippers were duly complied with.

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 (1) of

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 (1) of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 10

Section 7;

(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 such 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 such worship 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.

Section 18(1)(g): Presumption in favour of a Notified

Sikh Gurdwara on proof of certain facts when a claim to

property is made by an office-holder In any

proceedings before a Tribunal, if any past or present

office-holder denies that a right, title, or interest

recorded, in his name or in that of any person through

whom claims, in a record of rights, or in an annual

record, prepared in accordance with 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 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

(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

(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.

Basic issue according to us is whether the High Court had rightly

decided the questions raised before it in the background of Section 10. Copy

of the petition which was extracted by the High Court clearly shows that it

was under Section 10. The petition was reproduced in extenso. Bare reading

thereof shows that that it was in terms of Section 10. Sections 8 and 10

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. 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 10. Since they operate in different fields, it cannot be said

that an application under Section 10 was excluded when notification under

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 10

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 evidence, more particularly, that of PW 10, 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 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 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 common ground that the mahants

of this 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 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 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)

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 Prabhandhak

Committee (AIR 1984 SC 858), it was held as under:-

x x x x x x

"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 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

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 10

and then singing of some passages from the Holy Granth.

The former is called Katha and the second is called

Kirtan. A Sikh thus worships the Holy Words that are

written in the Granth Sahib, the Words or Shabada 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, 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.

(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 flagstaff

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 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 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

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

enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 16, the institution cannot be

declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara.

In Shiromani Gurudwara Prabhandhak 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 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 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, the appeals deserve dismissal, which we direct.