JAGADISH CHANDRA SINHA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent directed against the judgment and order dated August 30,1974, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court disposing of a writ petition which was registered as Civil Rule No. 1281 (W) of 1971. The writ petition having been dismissed, the petitioners, the She baits of the Deity Sree Iswar Radha Ballav Jew Thakur of the Paikpara Raj Estate are the appellants in this appeal. The short point which arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the endowment in favour of the Deity as aforesaid is exclusively for a religious or a charitable purpose or not within the meaning of Section 6(1 )(i) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

(2.) The deity as aforesaid is the family Deity established as such nearly a century ago by the ancestors of the present members of the Paikpara Raj Family. The, endowment has its sanction under a decree dated December 11, 1893. In a suit in the Original Side of this Court, being Suit No. 41 of 1893 between the then members of the Paikpara Raj Family, a reference to arbitration was made to effect a partition of the joint estate with the exception of such of them as in the opinion of the Arbitrator are debuttar and further to decide the manner in which such debuttar properties are to be held and to frame a scheme for management thereof. Sir Ramesh Chandra Mitter being the arbitrator filed an award declaring that the properties specified in Schedule A extending over the then Districts of Burdwan, Murshidabad, Jessore, Midnapore and Dinajpore are the Debuttar properties of the two Deities including the Deity as aforesaid which are not liable to be partitioned. ( Properties specified in Schedule "A/1" being the properties of the Deity Sree Sree Iswar Radha Ballav Jew Thakur). The arbitrator further framed a scheme set out in Schedule B to his award for the Seva Puja of the Deity and for the management of the Debuttar properties. In paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 the scheme provides who would be the She baits and in what turn they would carry on the Seva Puja. Paragraph 4 of the scheme provides; 'The She baits during their respective turns of worship shall be entitled to receive the net income to be derived from the Debuttar properties mentioned in Schedule A annexed hereto entrusted to apply the same towards the Seva or worship of the Thakur". The scheme then goes on to provide that the Debuttar properties should ordinarily remain under the joint management of the She baits who, however, were given authority to appoint a common manager in terms of the majority decision. The common manager is to be paid out of the estate and such a manager being vested with the powers of the She baits would keep regular accounts subject to inspection by the She baits. This in substance is the scheme and constitutes the dedication now under construction before us. On December 11, 1893 this Court passed a decree on the said award filed in the aforesaid suit in its original side.

(3.) It is not in dispute that section 6(1) (i) of the said Act provides that where the intermediary is a corporation or an institution established exclusively for religious or charitable purpose or is a person holding under an endowment exclusively for a purpose which is charitable or religious or both then such an intermediary is entitled to retain all lands held in khas for the said purpose. Section 17(1) of the said Act provides that in respect of tenanted lands of such an intermediary which vests in the State, the intermediary would be entitled to a perpetual annuity equal to the pet annual income from the estate or interest of such intermediary excluding the portion thereof which the intermediary has retained under the provision of sub-section (I) of section. 6. Section 12(2) further provides that such an intermediary shall be entitled to receive an annual ad interim payment of the approximate net annual income from the estate or interest of the intermediary excluding the portion thereof which the intermediary has retained under section 6(1).