IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.128 of 2009 DINESH PRASAD YADAV @ DINESH YADAV, son of Late Sanfi Yadav @ Sanki Yadav, resident of village Bangalia, P.S. Mansi, District Khagaria, President, Maa Katyani Asthan Religious Trust Committee, Village Bangalia, P.S. Mansi, District- Khagaria. . . . . . Opp. Party- Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Collector Khagaria. 2. The Bihar State Religious Trust Board, through its Chairman Vidyapati Marg, Patna. 3. Surendra Bhagat, son of Deo Narain Bhagat, resident of village Bal Kunda, P.S. Mansi, District- Khagaria. . . . . Appellants- respondents. For the Appellant : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Ambuj Nayan Choubey, Advocate ----------- 8/ 11.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the State. The appellant is aggrieved by order dated 09.05.2007 passed by District Judge, Khagaria in Misc. Case no. 01 of 2001 whereby he set aside the order bearing Memo no. 3531 dated 19.01.2001 passed by the Board. The facts of the case in short is as follows: The Chairman, Bihar State Religious Trust Board exercising his power under Section 29 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act superseded the committee vide his Memo no. 3531 dated 19.01.2001 headed by Surendra Bhagat, President of Maa katyani Asthan Religious Trust Committee, Bangalia within Mansi police station in the District of Khagaria. During the pendency of the Misc. case, the Board gave concurrence to the order of the Chairman in exercise of power under Section 38 of the Act. The District Judge observed that there was undue delay in - 2 - granting such concurrence to the order of the Chairman, thus the compliance was not in terms of the spirit of the provisions of the Act. The District Judge, thus set aside the order of the Chairman bearing Memo no. 3531 dated 19.01.2001 and observed that Board may take suitable steps after following due legal procedure. It is not in dispute that the Religious Trust Board is superseded and is being governed by Administrator. The Administrator vide his order dated 17.11.2009 constituted 7 men committed under the Chairmanship of Surendra Bhagat and Secretary Ramanand Sada. The petitioner has filed an interlocutory application for staying the operation of the order dated 17.11.2009. He submits that persons having antecedents have been made members of the new committee. In support of his submission, learned counsel has referred to report of officer-in-charge dated 29.09.2008 addressed to the Superintendent of the Board. Counsel for the Religious Trust Board submits that if the appellant has any grievance, he may approach the Administrator and file his representation before him bringing specific documents in support of his allegations. After hearing the counsel for the parties, I find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the Board, and as such observe that if appellant files a representation before the Administrator bringing specific allegations supported by documents, the latter may take suitable steps in accordance with law, after giving - 3 - notice to the other side. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)