IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.195 of 2004 SHIV SATYA GURU TRUST COMMITTE Versus BIHAR HINDU RELIGIOUS TRUST BO ----------- For the appellant : Mr. Anirudh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Prasad No.1, Adv. For the respondent no.1: Mr. Shekhar Singh, Adv. ------------------ 13. 22.12.2008 The O.P. No.2 Mushaharu Mahto was the President of Shiv Satya Guru Trust Committee, Dighari. The Bihar State Hindu Religious Trust Board exercising its powers under Section 32 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, 1950, vide its letter No.2654 dated 27.1.1999 constituted a new Trust Committee under the Presidentship of SDO, Lakhisarai and Secretaryship of the appellant Sanjay Kumar Mahto. In this Trust Committee, the O.P. No.2 Mushaharu Mahto was not included. The said letter No.2654 dated 27.1.1999 shows that the Committee thereunder had been constituted for the preservation, proper management and all round development of the Trust properties and the Committee was an ad hoc Committee to remain operative till further orders. Against the order as passed under the aforesaid letter No.2654 the respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto had filed Miscellaneous Petition No.9 of 1999 before the District Judge, Munger but the same was dismissed by order dated 2.6.2000. Thereafter, Miscellaneous Appeal No.557 of 2000 was also filed which too dismissed. Mushaharu Mahto had also filed CWJC No. 7764 of 2000 but that was also dismissed as withdrawn. Subsequently, vide letter No. 4039 dated 23.2.2001 the Board on consideration of the show cause reply filed by the parties came to find that the Committee constituted under the Secretaryship of appellant Sanjay - 2 - Kumar Mahto was not taking any interest for the preservation and protection of the Trust properties and the Committee had also not taken the charge. In this situation, the Board decided to resume the old Trust Committee under the Presidentship of respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto but shortly thereafter it was on 27.2.2001 that the Board vide its letter No.4096 of that date stayed the operation of the aforesaid letter No.4039 dated 23.2.2001 whereby the old Trust Committee under the Presidentship of respondent Mushaharu Mahto was revived, was stayed and it was also mentioned in that letter that final decision will be taken after necessary inquiry and perusal of documents both sides. Letter on vide letter No. 2940 dated 14.8.2001 the aforesaid letter No.4039 dated 23.2.2001, the Board on consideration of the local inquiry report as well as documents of both sides found that Trust Committee under the Presidentship of Mushaharu Mahto working as per the trust deed and therefore the aforesaid letter No.4096 dated 27.2.2001 was recalled. Thus, the Committee constituted under Board’s letter No. 4039 dated 23.2.2001 under the Presidentship of respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto was upheld and the same was given finality. It was due to withdrawal of the aforesaid letter No.4096 vide letter No.2940 which gave finality to the Trust Committee under the Presidentship of respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto that the appellant Sanjay Kumar Mahto had approached the learned District Judge under Miscellaneous Case No.48 of 2001 which was dismissed by the impugned order which is subject matter of this appeal. During hearing the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was carrying out his duties with all sincerity and diligently and - 3 - that there was allegation against the respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto about misappropriation of the Trust properties but without considering all these materials the Trust Board removed him (appellant) and again inducted Mushaharu Mahto as the Secretary of the Committee. In reply to this, the learned counsel for the respondent replied that the very letter No.2654 whereby and whereunder the appellant was made Secretary of the Committee itself shows that the Committee was an ad hoc Committee which was to remain operative till further orders. In the contents of the letter No.4039 whereby the appellant was removed and the respondent No. Mushaharu Mahto was inducted in the Committee it is categorically mentioned that the Committee under the Secretaryship of the appellant had not taken charge and that it was not doing anything about the preservation and protection of the Trust properties. Anyway the appellant was again given further opportunities to put his claims by filing his documents before the Board and thereafter on consideration of those documents and the inquiry reports as well as wishes of the founder of the Trust, the Board came to find that the Committee under the Presidentship of respondent No.2 Mushaharu Mahto was the proper and working Committee. Thus the Board after considering all facts and circumstances and also giving opportunity of hearing to both sides had taken its decision as a final decision. There does not appear to be and illegality and impropriety in the orders of the Board. The District Judge has rightly refused the appellant’s prayer and upheld the decision of the Board. I find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. Ravi/- (C.M. Prasad, J.)