MEENAKSHI NAIDOO Vs. SUBRAMANIYA SASTRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against an order of the High Court of Madras which cancelled an order of the District Judge of Madura appointing the present Appellant to fill up a vacancy in the committee of a pagoda in the Madras Presidency.

(2.) THE appointment was made by the District Judge under the provisions of Section 10 of Act XX of 1863, entitled "An Act to enable the Government to divest itself of the management of I religious endowments," and commonly known as the Pagoda Act. By that Act it was provided that the local government should appoint one or more committees in every division or district to take the place, and to exercise the powers of, the Board of Ee-venue and the local agents, under the regulations thereby repealed, that the members of such committees should be appointed from among persons professing the religion for the purposes of which the temple, or other religious establishment, was founded or should be maintained, and in accordance, so far as could be ascertained, with the general wishes of those, who were interested in the maintenance of such temple or religious establishment, and that the appointments should be for life. Section 10 provided for supplying vacancies in the following terms: "Whenever any vacancy shall occur among the members of a committee appointed as above, a new member shall be elected to fill the vacancy by the persons interested as above provided. The remaining members of the committee shall, as soon as possible, give public notice of such vacancy, and shall fix a day, which shall not be later than three months from the date of such vacancy, for an election of a new member by the persons interested, as above provided, under rules for elections which shall be framed by the local government, and whoever shall be then elected under the said rules shall be a member of the committee to fill such vacancy. If any vacancy as aforesaid shall not be filled up by such election as aforesaid within three months after it has occurred the Civil Court, on the application of any person whatever, may appoint a person to fill the vacancy, or may order that the vacancy be forthwith filled up by the remaining members of the committee, with which order it shall then be the duty of such remaining members to comply; and if this order be not complied with the Civil Court may appoint a member to fill the said vacancy."

(3.) THE committees appointed under the Act appear to have varied in number; in the case under consideration a committee of five was originally appointed. There had been changes from time to time, and, on the 4th of September, 1880, Gurusami, one of the then five members of the committee, died.