DHARUL ULAM MADARSHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The civil revision petitioner is a Madarsha represented by its trustee. It is running a school, where 17 students are studying Arabic language. The students are provided with free food, clothing and shelter. The petitioner's case is that the object of running the Madarsha for which the Trust was created was to impart instructions in Islamic religion and to teach Koran to the Muslim boys and girls in Arabic language and the Trust is, therefore, a Public Trust of a religious nature entitled to claim exemption under S. 2 of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act 1961 (Act 58 Of 1961). The Authorised officer came to the conclusion that the Madarsha is an institution similar to Vedapadasala, and there is no mention about any religious service being rendered and it should be treated as a public Trust of charitable nature and is entitled to retain only 5 standard acres and the remaining extent was declared as surplus I ' and. on appeal, the Land Tribunal held that the Madarsha is only imparting general education to the Muslim boys and girls and the Trust is not giving any religious instructions and hence it is not a Public Trust of a religious nature and thus confirmed the findings of the Authorised Officer. Hence the Present civil revision petition before this court.

(2.) The learned counsel for the civil revision Petitioner relying on a decision of a Division Bench of this court reported in Vedapatasala Trust Sooramangalam v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1981y, 1 Mad LJ 225, contended that imparting of instruction in Vedas and Agamas has been construed by this court as one of religious nature and a trust, which is of a Public nature and which provides for the imparting of instructions in Vedas and Agamas is a religious trust of a public nature and on the same analogy the trust which runs the Madarsha for imparting religious instruction to Muslim boys and girls studying in the Madarsha should be construed as a religious trust of a public nature.

(3.) In the decision reported in A. K. Vavallevvai Maricair v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1979-2 Mad LJ 121, religious instruction and lessons on Islamic religion were given in the Madarsha for the benefit of the Muslim boys and girls. The question arose whether the running of such Madarsha can be construed as a religious object or merely as a charitable object. This court held -