BEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the order dated 16.3.2011 passed in W.P. No. 1808/2011. With the consent of parties appeal is disposed of finally.

(2.) The land of Survey Nos. 248, 366, 372, 914, 1162, 1163, 1168 and 910 of village Bhagwasa and Kadore Ka Pura, Tehsil Gohad are of the ownership of temple Ramjanki, which is a Muafi land. The Pujari of the temple had granted the land to the appellants for cultivation for a period of one year. The appellants had cultivated the land and they had grown some crop. Vide order Annexure P/1 the Sub-Divisional Officer directed that the crop shall be kept in the Supurdgi of the Patwari. That order was challenged by the appellants in the writ petition. The writ Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the land is of the ownership of the temple and the Pujari or Mahant has no right to claim right of ownership in the property owned by the temple because the land was granted for cultivation to the appellants, hence the appellants have no legal right.

(3.) The Division Bench of this Court in the matter of State of M.P. & Ors. Vs. Mandir Shri Khanderao, Gwalior, 2000 3 MPLJ 172, after considering the provisions of Qawaid Muafidaran (Gwalior), Regulation 13 has held that agricultural lands attached to Deity or temple are of the ownership of the temple. However, the Pujari has the right of cultivation. In the present case Pujari had given the land for cultivation to the appellants for a period of one year. The appellants had cultivated the land. In the circumstances appellants had a right to cultivate the crop and harvest the crop also. In this view of the matter this appeal is disposed of with a direction that appellants should be eligible to receive the proceeds of the crop of the lands, which they had cultivated but this direction is only for a particular year. On the basis of the aforesaid direction no right shall accrue in favour of the appellants. The impugned order passed by the writ Court is modified accordingly. The appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs.