DIBAKAR BADADALAI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is public interest litigation filed by the petitioners who are the residents of Brahmagiri and are vitally interested for the protection of the valuable properties of the ancient religious shrines particularly, the properties of Lord Alarnath from the hands of unauthorized encroachers. They seek to challenge the illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory action of the opposite parties, more particular opposite party No.2. and 3 in not implementing the direction of this Court issued in O.J.C. No.4646 of 2002 and proceeding to settle the land in favour of the encroachers and assisting the Court properly against the opposite party No.6 for which the deity is losing straight away Rs. 20 lakhs by ignoring the offer of one Parasuram Pradhan pursuant to the direction of this Hon'ble Court. The aforesaid action is not only arbitrary, illegal, and discriminatory but also runs contrary to the principles decided by this Court as well as the provisions contained in the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 and the rules framed thereunder and the impugned action of the opposite party No. 2 against the interest of the devotees thus warrants the interference by this Court. They further seek to challenge the Constitution of the Board of Trustees under Section 41 of the aforesaid Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. (Hereinafter called "the Act").

(2.) Necessary brief facts are stated hereunder for the purpose of appreciating the rival legal contentions urged in this case with a view to find out as to whether the impugned order dated 2.8.2008 passed by opposite party No.2 is liable to be quashed.

(3.) The brief facts are that the aforesaid Lord Alarnath temple is ancient and historical and in the mythological version Alarnath finds mention within the Brahmapitha otherwise known as Brahmagiri. It is stated that once Shri Chaitanya visited Lord Jagannath Temple for darshan but due to Anabasar he could not offer prayer for which he decided to commit suicide in the deep sea. At that time an unsee voice ordained him to go to Brahmagiri to offer prayer and have darshan of Lord Alarnath with the belief that Lord Jagannath meditates there during that period. The aforesaid facts are stated to bring home the point that the said temple is a public temple and large number of devotees on account of religious belief and faith visit the said temple and the Rajas have donated vast extent of immoveable properties for the management and seva puja of the deity. The said properties are a public properties to augment the income for maintenance of the said deity by conducting religious puja and performance of rituals. Therefore, it is a public temple and properties attached to it are public properties. Therefore, the property required to be sold must be in accordance with the provisions of the Act and it must fetch marketable revenue to the Trust. The same can be obtained by taking proceedings under Section 19 of the Act and also giving public notice calling upon the interested persons to participate in the proceedings. It is sated that 2.5 acres of land of the deity has been recovered from illegal encroachers but for one reason or the other has been sold to persons who have been in unlawful possession of the same which will affect public interest. There was unauthorized encroachment over the landed properties of the temple on the basis of illegal sale deed. The Board of trustees initiated proceedings against the illegal encroachers under Sections 25 and 68 of the Act. Pursuant to the said activities a fruitful result came out and information has been gathered that substantial amount near about Rs. 25 lakhs has been recovered and has been kept in shape of fixed deposits on long term basis and the interest accrued is meant to be used for the daily puja of the deity and performance of religious rituals. Section 29 of the Act confers power upon the Board of Trustees relating to transaction of the property of the institution.