A RAJAIAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By his proceedings dated 16-8-1977 the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments, Hyderabad, appointed seven persons, including the petitioner herein, as non-hereditary trustees of "Sree Ujjaini Mahankali Devasthanam" Secunderabad, By another proceeding of the same day, the Deputy Commissioner called upon the members of the Trust Board to assemble for a special meeting of the Trust Board to be held within the premises of the temple at 2-30 p.m on 26 8-1977 for electing a Chairman. Only four members attended the meeting and since, according to the Rules the quorum is five, the meeting was adjourned. Another meeting of the Trust Board was convened on 9-9-1977 for the same purpose. Even at this meeting the three members, who did not attend the first meeting, again did not attend. Sometime later the three members, including the petitioner, came forward with explanations for their absence at the said two meetings. The record does not show whether the reasons assigned by them for their absence were accepted as true, or not. Be that as it may, on 19-9-77 the Asst. Commissioner administered the oath to the said three members. (The other four members were administered oath even at the first meeting).

(2.) By his proceeding dated 7-12-1977 the Deputy Commissioner Dominated the petitioner as the Chairman of the Trust Board under Section 17 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act"), on the ground that no Chairman was elected within sixty days. Against the said order, a revision appears to have been filed by other member to the Government which has been allowed under the impugned order. The order of the Deputy Commissioner nominating the petitioner as the Chairman, has been set aside, with the result that a meeting has now to be called for electing the Chairman.

(3.) Mr. G. Suryanarayana Murthy, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, assails the basis of the Government's order and contends that since sixty days elapsed from the date ot constitution of the Trust Board, without the trustees electing a Chairman, the Deputy Commissioner was within his powers to nominate a Chairman. It is argued that after the oath ot office was administered to the remaining three trustees on 17-9-1977, it was not obligatory upon the Deputy Commissioner or the Asst. Commissioner to call for another special meeting for electing a chairman. Indeed, according to the learned counsel, the Rules contemplate only two special meetings for this purpose, and no third meeting is contemplated or is permissible.