JAIMAL SINGH Vs. SHIROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE AMRITSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the Judicial Commission has the jurisdiction under Section 142 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, to adjudicate on the validity of the constitution of a nominated Committee under Section 87 (1) (a) of the said Act, is the meaningful question which has necessitated the admission of ttds. 4ppeal for decision by a Full Bench.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the parties are agreed that apart from some fragmentary challenge on merits the aforesaid question of law is the only substantial one in issue before us. It, therefore, suffices to notice the facts with relative brevity relevant thereto. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee had presented the petition under Section 142 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Judicial Commission against Harbhajan Singh and Jaimal Singh respondents. It was averred therein that Harbhajan Singh respondent was the President of the former Committee of management of the notified Sikh Gurdwara, Sangatpura, till nominated Committee was notified by a notification dated December 22, 1973 which had duly elected Jaimal Singh appellant as its President. It was the claim that Harbhajan Singh respondent was imperatively bound to hand over the complete charge of all the Gurdwara property books of account and cash in hand etc. to Jaimal Singh appellant on the constitution of the new Committee, but he had failed to do so. On the aforesaid allegations, the relief claimed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee was that Harbhajan Singh respondent be directed to hand over complete charge of all property, record etc. to the appellant-Jaimal Singh.

(3.) IN response to the notice issued by the Judicial Commission Harbhajan Singh respondent appeared and controverted the allegations. The appellant, despite service did not even choose to appear and hence proceedings against him were ordered exparte.