HARDEO SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petitioners filed present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to frame the Scheme of Management for the administration of Gurudwara Nanakmata Sahib in conformity with the judgment dated 20.08.1935 passed by Mr. J.R.W. Benett Esquire, ICS, District Judge, Kumaon in Civil Suit No.3 of 1934 (N), Sardar Santok Singh and others vs. Chaudhary Ram Singh alias Sarupanand under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, wherein the Court had framed the guidelines for administering/ managing the said Shrine. Further prayer has been made for quashing the Byelaws so framed and registered under the Societies Act, in 1959.

(2.) Earlier the matter was heard and decided on 31.03.2006 in the following manner:

(3.) Against the aforesaid judgment, Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 21091 -21092/2007 were filed, in which an application I.A No. 11 -12 of 2011 was filed by the petitioners and respondent no.1 before Hon'ble Supreme Court for disposing of the Special Leave petition in terms of the settlement reached in between them. It was submitted by the applicants in I.A. No. 11 -12 of 2011 before Hon'ble Supreme Court that they are the only persons concerned and, therefore, the settlement is reached between them is acceptable to the community. The applicants for impleadment, however, opposed the said settlement. After considering the facts and circumstances, Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed of the Special Leave Petition by directing the High Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within three months. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed in the order that it will be open to the petitioners and the first respondent to report the settlement to the Single Judge of the High court before whom the matter is pending. If and when the settlement is reported, the Single Judge will consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Hon'ble Supreme Court also observed that the High Court will also hear the other parties to the writ petition and any person desiring to be impleaded, in accordance with law. After remand, the parties were heard several times. On 14.10.2011 following order was passed by this Court: