BAIKUNTHA NATH DAS Vs. NRUSINGHANATH MAHAPRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment dated 24th February, 1990 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Orissa, Bhubaneswar is assailed by the opposite party -appellants in this appeal filed Under Section 44 (2) of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 to 5 as petitioners filed an application before the Addl. Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack Zone. Cuttack Under Section 41 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowment Act, 1951 (for short O.H.R.E. Act, 1951) which was registered as O.A. No. 16/83, inter aita, praying to declare the Institution of Nrusinghanath Mahaprabhu Bije Archulli, Post Office - Somepur, District - Cuttack as a public deity being managed by Non -hereditary Trust Board and its lands as belonging to public religious endowments. According to the said respondents the foundation of the said Institution has been lost in antiquity and the villagers have been managing its affairs treating it as a public deity. The villagers out of their own contribution constructed a temple and installed the deity thereon about 40 years back. They also appointed the ancestors of the present appellants to do the Seva Puja of the deity as Pujaks. It is asserted that the entire management of the deity and its properties was in the hands of the villagers and in accordance with the instructions and supervision of the villagers and the ancestors of the respondents used to do the Seva Puja to the deity.

(3.) ON the basis of the pleadings the Addl. Asst. Commissioner of Endowments framed seven issues. The petitioners got examined six witnesses and exhibited six documents to substantiate their case. At the other hand, the opposite parties got examined three witnesses and exhibited as many as eighteen documents. The Addl. Asst. Commissioner by judgment dtd. 28.5.87 declared the deity, Sri Nrusinghanath Mahaprabhu, as a public deity and its place as a place of public religious worship and the Institution as' a temple as defined under the O.H.R.E. Act, 1951. It was further declared that the lands in the name of the deity measuring Ac.9.09 decimals belong to public religious endowments and the Institution is managed by a Non -hereditary Trust Board and that the opposite party -appellants are not the hereditary trustees. It was further declared that the opposite party -appellants are to remain in possession of the lands of the deity in lieu of their doing Seva Puja of the deity, but in case of default in doing Seva Puja they were to be dispossessed from the lands as per the provisions of the O.H.R.E. Act, 1951. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment the appellants preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, which was registered as F.A. No. 13/1987. Learned Deputy Commissioner of Endowments confirmed the findings arrived at by the Addl. Asst. Commissioner of Endowments that the Institution, in question was a public religious. Institution. The Deputy Commissioner on the basis of the evidence of O.P.W. 1. further held that the findings of the Addl. Asst. Commissioner to the effect that the opposite -party appellants were not the hereditary trustees needed no interference. Being aggrieved, the appellants have preferred this appeal.