BHARPUR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DO the provisions of the places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 (Act 42 of 1991)render the inclusion of Gurudwaras in Schedule I to the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 and the orders passed thereunder void only because the execution proceedings are pending? This is the short question that has been raised in these two writ petitions which have been listed together for hearing. Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts in Civil Writ Petition No. 1783 of 1994. The undisputed facts may be briefly noticed.

(2.) GURDWARA Sri Guru Teg Bahadur Sahib is located in Patti Manga. The petitioners who are residents of village Khiala Kalan, Tehsil and District Mansa, allege that this Gurdwara was initially under the management of Jat Tiwana. Thereafter, Surjan Singh was recorded as the Mahant followed by his son, Jiwan Singh. On his death, Mahant Gurdit Singh son of Jiwan Singh took over the management. Thereafter, his son, Kartar Singh started managing and controlling the institution also its properties in the capacity of a Mahant, Mohatmim and Gaddinashin. The petitioners claim to be assisting him in the over all control end administration and up-keeping of the Institution and its properties. All the incumbents of the office of Mahantship have been Tiwana Jats who had founded the village and are the owners of the landed property. They had established the Institution for the purposes of worship.

(3.) THE Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (Respondent No. 5) filed a suit for possession of the notified Sikh Gurdwara as also the lands mentioned in the notification dated July 21, 1961. Vide its judgment dated November 10, 1971, the Tribunal decreed the suit. Gurdit Singh having died in the meantime, his son Kartar Singh filed an appeal viz. RFA No. 17 of 1972. This appeal was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment and decree dated October 4, 1982. The order passed by the Tribunal is at Annexure R. 1 with the written statement filed by respondent No. 5. The decree passed by this Court in RFA No. 17 of 1972 is at annexure R. 2. Thereafter, the Committee of management initiated execution proceedings through the general attorney of Shiromani Gurdawara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar. The learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda decided this application vide order dated December 5, 1990. He ordered that "as far as the Gurdwara building mentioned at No. 1 of the execution application is concerned, the decree in respect of the same is executable and no objection has been raised by either party in respect of the Gurdwara building. " As such, he ordered that warrant of actual possession in respect of the Gurdwara building be issued. With regard to the land, it was held that "the execution application is not maintainable because of the fact that the Khasra numbers possession of which is sought by the decree holder in this (these)execution proceedings are entirely different from the Khasra numbers regarding which the suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 10. 11. 1971. " However, it was ordered that the decree holder shall be entitled to get the decree amended by incorporating the new Khasra number as carved out during the consolidation proceedings and then to file" fresh application for possession. " It was also held that Jaswant Singh and Hazura Singh cannot be physically ousted from the land under their tenancy in the execution proceedings in the absence of a specific order of a competent revenue Court. A Civil Revision Petition No. 1556 of 1992 challenging the order of the executing Court is stated to be still pending. " These are the undisputed facts.