SATRADHIKAR BENGANA ATI SATRA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Rule No. 3118 of 1994 has been filed on behalf of the Satradhikar of Bengana-ati Satra, P.O. Majuli, District Jorhat, impugning the vires of Section 25A of the Assam State Acquisition of Lands belonging to Religious or Charitable Institutions of Public Nature Act, 1959 (Assam Act DC of 1961) (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). The offending provision provides for constitution of a committee to have control over the matter of utilisation of the annuity and verification of the proper maintenance of the institution. Section 25A of the Act has been inserted by means of Assam Act No. XIX of 1987. Its operation, however, remained in abeyance; but it was made effective in the year 1994, which gave rise to the grievance of the petitioners; hence, this petition.

(2.) Civil Rule No. 6221 of 1998 has been filed by some of the Dolois of Kamakhya temple. According to the averments made in the petition, the petitioners are engaged in the management of the affairs and administration of the temple and they are aggrieved by an order dated 21.10.98 passed by the District Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati, on the application said to be moved by the Bardeuri Samaj of the Kamakhya temple. The learned District Judge by means of the impugned order has provided that the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, Guwahati shall constitute a committee, either under Section 25-A of the Act by dissolving the existing committee, or to constitute an Ad-hoc Committee from the members of the Bardeuri Samaj for proper management of the affairs of the duties within a month from the date of the order. The Committee was to function till regular election was held after disposal of the Public Interest Litigation petition pending before the High Court. The jurisdiction of the District Judge to pass the order has also been challenged. This petition was also ordered to be heard along with Civil Rule No. 3118 of 1994.

(3.) We have heard Shri K.P. Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Civil Rule No. 3118 of 1994, and Shri B.K. Goswami and Shri S. Medhi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenors. Shri N. Dutta, learned counsel appeared for the petitioners in Civil Rule No. 6221 of 1998. Shri P.G. Baruah, learned Advocate General, Assam, appeared for the respondents. We would take up Civil Rule No. 3118 of 1994 as the leading petition as the fate of Civil Rule No. 6221 of 1998 will depend upon the decision in that petition.