IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10488 of 2005 MAHANTH RAJIV RANJAN DAS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner :M/s Pushkar Narain Shahi, Pankaj Kumar Singh & Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Advocates For the State :Mr. R.C. Thakur, S.C. 4(Ceiling) ------------- 07/ 02.9.2008 Counsel for the State, Standing Counsel No.4 (Ceiling) has filed reply to the first and second supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 3. Petitioner is a land holder, who is aggrieved by the appellate order of the Collector, Sheohar dated 22.3.2002, as contained in Annexure-14 to this application, which has also been affirmed by the Board of Revenue, Bihar under Resolution dated 07.12.2004, Annexure-18 to this application and thereunder Sheetalpatti and Jahangirpur Mathas have been held not to be Public Religious Trust contrary to the observations of this Court made in the order dated 17.3.1998, passed in CWJC No. 7356 of 1996, Annexure-10 to this application. For ready reference, observations made by this Court in the aforesaid order is quoted hereinbelow: “ From the averments made in the writ petition it appears that the Maths in question are over hundred years old, duly registered with the Bihar State Board of Religious Trust, which is indicative, prima facie, of its public nature. In my view the Collector committed 2 error in rejecting outright the claim for the maths. I am, therefore, inclined to set aside that part of the order and to direct him to consider the claim afresh after giving opportunity of hearing and producing evidence of the petitioner.” 4. From perusal of the two orders passed by the authorities dated 22.3.2002 and 07.12.2004, Anexures-14 and 18 it, however, appears that the petitioner failed to produce evidence before the authorities to satisfy them about the Public Religious Character of the Mathas in question, which finding of the authorities is being disputed by the petitioner, with reference to the averments made in paragraph 24 of the writ petition with reference to the petition dated 28.12.2001 and 2.2.2002 annexing copy of the documents on the basis of which petitioner attempted to establish that the two Mathas were Public Religious Institutions more than 100 years old. Filing of the two petitions and the documents have not been disputed in the counter affidavit and the reply affidavit filed on behalf of the authorities today. It is, however, stated therein that the petitions are on record, but the documents annexed with the petitions are missing from the records, as such, could not be considered by the authorities while passing the two orders dated 07.12.2004 and 22.3.2002. Counsel for the petitioner has already placed the copies of the documents along with the writ petition and the rejoinder affidavit, which are contained in Annexures-6 to 9, 13 and 19 to 25 and petitioner shall again furnish the same before the Collector of the District on 3 29.9.2008 when the Collector shall not only peruse and examine the documents referred to above objectively, but shall also be at liberty to hold local inspection of the two religious institutions so as to satisfy himself about the Public Religious character of the Maths. The local inspection shall be made by the Collector of the District after notice to the petitioner and petitioner should also cooperate with the authorities, failing which the authorities shall be at liberty to proceed ex parte. 5. Accordingly, order dated 07.12.2004 and 22.3.2002, Annexures-18 and 14 are quashed with liberty to the authorities to pass fresh orders in accordance with law taking into account the observations made above. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)