IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.214 of 2006 1. TORMAL DILSUKH ROY DHARAMSHALA, Ram Das Path, Laheri Tola, Bhagalpur, P.O. Bhagalpur City, P.S. Kotwali, District Bhagalpur. 2. Shyam Prasad Bajoriya son of late Sri Lal Bajoriya, at present President of Tormal Dilshuk Roy Dharmshala (Public Trust), resident of Mohalla Nathnagar, P.O. and P.S. Nathnagar, District Bhagalpur. 3. Kailash Singhaniya alias Kailash Prasad Singhania, son of late Ghanshyam Das Singhaniya, at present member of Dilsukh Roy Dharmshala, resident of Mohalla Burhanath Road, P.S. Kotwali, District Bhagalpur. 4. Raj Kumar Singhania, son of late Chandanmal Singhania, Secretary of Tormal Dilsukh Roy Dharmshala, resident of Gulab Ram Lane, P.S. Kotwali, District Bhagalpur. 5. Binay Kumar Singhania, son of late Mahabir Prasad Singhania, at present Executive member(Chashier), resident of Mohalla R.P. Road, P.S. Kotwali, District Bhagalpur. 6. Murari Lal Khemka, son of late Ram Niwas Khemka, Member and will founder family, Tormal Dilsukh Roy Dharamshala, resident of Mohalla Bhudharmal Beilane, Sujajganj, P.S. Kotwali, District Bhagalpur.—Petitioners-- Appellants Versus 1. THE PRESIDENT OF BIHAR HINDU Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna. 2. The Special Officer, Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna—opposite parties--- Respondents. ----------- For the appellants : M/S A.P.Jittu,Radha Mohan Verma For the intervener-respondents:M/s.Raj Kumar,Praveen Kumar. ------ 14. 30.9.2008 The order under challenge is dated 26.4.2006 passed in Misc. case no. 43/2005 by learned District Judge, Bhagalpur, whereby and whereunder he has dismissed misc.petition of the appellant Tormal Dilsukh Roy Dharamshala & ors. on the ground that learned counsel for the appellants could not point out any provision of law under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act so that such provision of sanction is required by the court, i.e., court of District Judge. Hence, it has been held that misc. petition was not maintainable and, accordingly, rejected. 2 Learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the intervener respondents Mohri Lal Singhanika & ors. have been heard. No body appears for the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Board. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that learned court below should not have dismissed such misc. petition on technical ground as learned counsel for the appellants failed to point out any relevant provision of law. Learned counsel for the intervener respondents has also submitted that the jurisdiction of the District Judge lies for interfering such petition. So, learned counsel for the appellants and intervener respondents have jointly urged to remit the matter to the court below for deciding the petition on merit by giving them an opportunity of being heard. Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that Bihar Hindu Religious Trust is not coming forward to dispute his contention. In the facts and circumstances, as stated above, the impugned order is set aside and learned court below is directed to dispose of the petition in accordance with law and, accordingly, it is disposed of. (Subash Chandra Jha,J.) spal/