HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL (Court’s order whether the case is or not approved for reporting) (Chapter VIII Rule 32 (2)(b) Description of the case. W.P. No. 984/04 (M/S) Tarai Kala Sangam Shri Ram Leela Committee VS Civil Judge (J.D.) Udham Singh Nagar and antoher Approved for reporting. _______________________ Not approved for reporting Date of decision 13th October 2004. Initial of Judge HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 984 of 2004 (MS) Tarai Kala Sangam Shri Ram Leela Committee, Govindpur, District Udham Singh Nagar …………. Petitioner Versus Civil Judge (J.D.) Udham Singh Nagar & antoher …….. Respondents Sri Sudhi Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Sri B.C. Pandey, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri Naresh Pant Dated: October 13, 2004 Hon. Rajesh Tandon J. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By the present writ petition the petitioiner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 5.10.2004 passed by the respondent no.1 in Civil Suit No. 32 of 2000 Shambhu Prasad Joshi vs. Tarai Kala Sangam Sri Ram Leela Committee and others. Briefly stated a suit was filed by the plantiff respondent no.2 being suit No. 32 of 2000 for grant of permanent injunction on plot no. 779 area 9000 sq. feet situated at village Gularbhoj, Tehsil Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The petitioner has filed a written statement alongwith the counter claim stating therein that the school of the respondent no.2 is situated in the area 20 x 50 sq. feet and in the alleged map the respondent no.2 has included the land of the petitioner’s society. The plantiff respondent no.2 has filed an application 5- Ga for grant of interim injunction. The petitioner has also filed application for grant of interim injunction. Respondent no.1 on 30.1.2001 has allowed both the applications. The order dated 30.1.2001 is quoted below: blds vfrfjDr oknh us tks nLrkost bl U;k;ky; ds le{k izLrqr fd;s gSA muesa nLrkost la0 85x @1 is”kdj xnjiqj }kjk tkjh fd;s x;s fookfnr Ldwy ds uD”ks dh izfrfyfi gSA ;s nLrkost egRoiw.kZ nLrkost gS vkSj blesa fookfnr Ldwy dh iwjh iSekbZ”k Hkh of.kZr gS] lkFk gh lkFk jkeyhyk eap Hkh bl uD”ks esa fo?keku fn[kk;k x;k gSA nLrkost la0 85x @2 rjkbZ dyk laxe }kjk ftyk csfld f”k{kk vf/kdkjh dks fy[ks x;s i= dh QksVks izfrfyfi gSA ÞmijksDr nLrkost esa is”kdj xnjiqj esa Li’V :Ik ls mYys[k fd;k gS fd [kljk ua0 52 o 53 esa jkeyhyk eSnku fLFkr gSA bldh pkjks vkSj ls iSekb”k iwjc es 89 fQV] if”pe esa 133-5 fQV] mRrj esa 180 fQV rFkk nf{k.k esa 226 fQV gSA nLrkost la0 81x @1 izfroknh i{k ds fy;s ,d egRoiw.kZ nLrkost gSA ;s nLrkost jkeyhyk eSnku dh pkSgnnh of.kZr djrk gS vkSj ,d ljdkjh deZpkjh }kjk bls tkjh fd;k x;k gSAß Þblds foijhr i=koyh ij miyC/k nLrkost la0 81 x @12 ls ;g Li’V gS fd nLrkost la0 81 x @12 esa of.kZr iSekbZ”k ij izfroknh la0&1 dk jkeyhyk xzkm.M LFkkfir gS os ml ij v/;klh gSA mijksDr laifRr ds laca/k esa izkFkZuki= 61 x ds rkjrE; esa izfroknh dk izFken`’V;k okn cuuk ik;k tkrk gSA lqfo/kk dk larqyu izfroknh ds i{k esa gS ,oa izkFkZuki= 61 x ds Lohdkj u fd;s tkus ls izfroknh dks viwj.kuh; {kfr dkfjr gksuk laHkkfor gSA izkFkZuki= 5 x rFkk izkFkZuki= 61 x rnuqlkj Lohdkj gksus ;ksX; ik;s tkrs gSAß blds vfrfjDr oknh us tks nLrkost bl U;k;ky; ds le{k izLrqr fd;s gSA muesa nLrkost la0 85x @1 is”kdj xnjiqj }kjk tkjh fd;s x;s fookfnr Ldwy ds uD”ks dh izfrfyfi gSA ;s nLrkost egRoiw.kZ nLrkost gS vkSj blesa fookfnr Ldwy dh iwjh iSekbZ”k Hkh of.kZr gS] lkFk gh lkFk jkeyhyk eap Hkh bl uD”ks esa fo?keku fn[kk;k x;k gSA nLrkost la0 85x @2 rjkbZ dyk laxe }kjk ftyk csfld f”k{kk vf/kdkjh dks fy[ks x;s i= dh QksVks izfrfyfi gSA ÞmijksDr nLrkost esa is”kdj xnjiqj esa Li’V :Ik ls mYys[k fd;k gS fd [kljk ua0 52 o 53 esa jkeyhyk eSnku fLFkr gSA bldh pkjks vkSj ls iSekbZ”k iwjc es 89 fQV] if”pe esa 133-5 fQV] mRrj esa 180 fQV rFkk nf{k.k esa 226 fQV gSA nLrkost la0 81 x @1 izfroknh i{k ds fy;s ,d egRoiw.kZ nLrkost gSA ;s nLrkost jkeyhyk eSnku dh pkSgnnh of.kZr djrk gS vkSj ,d ljdkjh deZpkjh }kjk bls tkjh fd;k x;k gSAß Þblds foijhr i=koyh ij miyC/k nLrkost la0 81 x @12 ls ;g Li’V gS fd nLrkost la0 81 x @12 esa of.kZr iSekbZ”k ij izfroknh la0&1 dk jkeyhyk xzkm.M LFkkfir gS os ml ij v/;klh gSA mijksDr laifRr ds laca/k esa izkFkZuki= 61 x ds rkjRkE; esa izfroknh dk izFken`’V;k okn cuuk ik;k tkrk gSA lqfo/kk dk larqyu izfroknh ds i{k esa gS ,oa izkFkZuki= 61 x ds Lohdkj u fd;s tkus ls izfroknh dks viwj.kuh; {kfr dkfjr gksuk laHkkfor gSA izkFkZuki= 5 x rFkk izkFkZuki= 61 x rnuqlkj Lohdkj gksus ;ksX; ik;s tkrs gSAÞ No appeal was preferred against the aforesaid order by any of the parties and the said order has become final. The counsel for the respondent has submitted that a commission was issued as per direction of the order dated 30.1.2001 who has reported regarding change of the site by the Ramleela Committee giving rise to the subsequent order, which has been challenged in the present proceedings. Petitioner has filed a report of the Advocate Commissioner dated 5.7.2004 which shows that the stage of the Ram Leela is situated on the same site, the report is quoted below:- Þjkeyhyk eSnku dh if”peh iwohZ o nf{k.kh lhek ij iqjkuh uhao ij nhoky cuh gwbZ gS nf{k.kh nhokj ls ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy ls yxh gwbZ gS djhc 4-5 QhV ÅWph dqN nwjh rd fufHkZr gS ftlesa ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dk yksgs dk xsV ckgj vkus tkus gsrq yxk gS xsV dh if”pe dh vksj ckgj ,d [kks[kk iku dk iM+k gqvk gSA jkeyhyk eSnku ds iwoZ esa [kkMUtk] if”pe esa xks”kkyk jksM] nf{k.k esa [kkMUtk ckn vkcknh rFkk ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dk Hkou o izkxa.k gS rFkk jkeyhyk eSnku ds mRrj esa edku o nqdkus gS jkeyhyk eSnku ds Hkhrj flesaUV dk xMk ihyj VwVk gqvk lrg ds cjkcj fn[k jgk gS ftls uD”kk utjh esa n”kkZ;k x;k gSA fookfnr LFky ij ekSdk eqvk;uk ls Kkr gqvk fd jkeyhyk eSnku ds nf{k.kh fn”kk dh vksj tks nhoky 4-5 fQV ÅWph cukbZ gqbZ gS og iqjkuh uhao ij gh fufeZr dh xbZ gS tks ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dh mRrjh lhek rFkk jkeyhyk eSnku dh nf{k.kh lhek dgykrh gS rRi”pkr ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy fufeZr gSAß From the plaint averment it appears that from the very beginning there is a dispute with regard to the are of the school as will appear from paragraph 9 of the plaint as well as from the reply and counter claim of the petitioner. The same are reproduced as under: Þ;g fd fo?kky; ds vkxs fo?kky; dh [kkyh izkxa.k ¼Hkw[k.M½ tks jktLo deZpkfj;ksa }kjk lhekafdr Hkh gS mDr Hkw[k.M esa fo?kky; ds Nk= Nk=kvksa dk dzhMk LFky ,o izkFkZuk LFky gS rFkk tkMks esa leLr d{kk;sa mijksDr eSnku esa gh yxkbZ tkrh gSA ftllsa izfroknhx.k dk dksbZ okLrk ljksdkj ugh gSAß Þ;g fd fo?kky; dk mijksDr Hkw[k.M ftls izfroknhx.k tcju xSj dkuwuh <ax ls cnek”kh ds cy ij dCtk djuk pkgrs gS] okn ds lkFk layXu uD”kk utjh esa yky jax dh L;kgh ls fpfUgr fd;k x;k gS mijksDr uD”kk utjh okn i= dk ,d Hkkx gSAß Þ;g fd izfroknhx.k }kjk fo?kky; ds if”pe esa vkjf{kr ou {ks= dh Hkwfe esa gh jkeyhyk xzkm.M cuk;k x;k gS rFkk O;fDrxr jktuhfrd dkj.ks ls izfroknhx.k fo?kky; dh Hkwfe ij dCtk djus dh fQjkd ea jgrs gS dbZ ckj fo?kky; esa yxs uy dks Hkh m[kkM fy;k x;k ftlds laca/k esa iqfyl esa fjiksVZ ntZ djkus ij iqfyl }kjk uy dh cjkenxh mijksDr yksxks ls dj fo?kky; dks lkSkik x;kAß Þ;g fd fo?kky; dh if”pe fn”kk eas fLFkr jkeyhyk xzkm.M ds inkf/kdkjh izfroknh mijksDr if”pe rjQ ls ckmUMªh rkj ckMdjus dk iz;kl dj pqds gS tks fd mijksDr fo?kky; dh Hkwfe esa vfrdze.k dj rFkk fo?kky; ds izkxa.k ij dCtk dj jkeyhyk xzkm.M esa feykus vkSj Ldwy dks {kfr igqWpkus dh xjt ls mudk iz;kl tkjh gSAß Paragraphs 8.9.10 Þ;g fd okn dk in la0&8 drbZ xyr gS Lohdkj ugh oknh ds fo?kky; dh mRrj dh vksj dk [kqyk LFkku mRrjnkrk izfooknh la0&1 }kjk jkeyhyk dk vk;kstu fd;k tkrk gS rFkk lEiw.kZ eSnku ij izR;sd c`gLifrokj dks lkIrkfgd cktkj yxk;k tkrk gs “ks’k fooj.k vfrfjDr dFku esa fn;k tk jgk gSAß Þ;g fd okn i= dk in la0 9 drbZ xyr gS Lohdkj ugh oknh }kjk fookfnr LFky dh drbZ xyr uD”kk utjh rS;k fd;k x;k gSAß Þ;g fd okn i= dk in la0 10 drbZ xyr gS Lohdkj ugh mRrjnkrk izfroknh }kjk vius jkeyhyk eSnku dks pksjksa vkSj dVhys rkjh ckM yxkbZ gS rFkk oknh ds fo?kky; ,oa jkeyhyk eSnku dh lhek dks foHkkftr djus okys LFky ij iDdh bZVks dh ckmUmMªh oky cuk;s tkus gsrq iDdh uho yxHkx 100 fQV yEch gS bl uhoa ds lkFk lkFk yxs gq;s rkjckM dks oknh}kjk tcjuxSj dkuwuh rjhds ls rksM dj vlkekftd rRoksa ds lg;ksx ls pqjk fy;k Fkk ftldh fjiksVZ mRrjnkrk izfroknh }kjk xqyjHkkst iqfyl pkSdh esa dh xbZ gSA “ks’k fooj.k vfrfjDr dFku esa fn;k tk jgk gSAß Paragraphs 22, 23, Þ;g fd mRrjnkrk izfroknh laLFkk dk dLck xqyjHkkst esa viuk ,d jkeyhyk xzkm.M gS ftldh yEckbZ iwjc if”pe 89 fQV] 133-5 fQV pkSMkbZ mRrj nf{k.k 180 fQV 226 fQV gS ftlds pkjksa vkSj izfroknh laLFkk }kjk rkjckM yxk j[kk gS rFkk xzkm.M ds if”pe dh vksj ,d iDdk LVsV 30 X 35 fQV dk cuk j[kk gS izfroknh laLFkk }kjk lu 86 ls yxkrkj izfro’kZ “kjn _r esa mDr xzkm.M esa jkeyhyk dk eapu fd;k tkrk jgk gSAß Þ;g fd LFkkuh; ukxfjdksa }kjk dLCkk xqyjHkkst es dh tk jgh jkeyhyk ds fy;s nqdkunkj ,slksfl;s”ku }kjk o’kZ 1980 esa ,d izLrko ikfjr dj mDr jkeyhyk xzkm.M dks ftldh iSekbZ”k iwjc 90 fQV] if”pe 145 fQV gS m0 180 fQV] nf{k.k 250 fQV gS dks jkeyhyk eSnku ds :Ik esa lqjf{kr j[kus dk izLrko ikfjr fd;k Fkk izLrko ds vk/kkj ij mDr of.kZr jkeyhyk eSnku jkeyhyk ds fy;s lqjf{kr Hkwfe gS vkSj mRrjnkrk izfroknh lu 1986 ds ckn rjkbZ dyk laxe jkeyhyk desVh dk xBu ,oa iathdj.k okn bl jkeyhyk eSnku dk j[kj[kko izca/k ,oa fu;=.k fd;k tk jgk gS jkeyhyk eSnku dks pkjksa vksj ls rkjckM ls ?ksj dj lqjf{kr j[kk gqvk gS rFkk eSnku ds if”pe esa jkeyhyk eap cuk gqvk gSAß Counter Claim Þ;g fd mRrjnkrk izfroknh jkeyhyk eSnku deSVh }kjk vius jkeyhyk eSnku dh lqj{kk gsrq mls pkjks vksj lhesaV ds [kEHks yxkkdj rkjckM o iDdh uhao cukdj jkeyhyk eSnku dh lhek cUn dh gqbZ gSA fdUrq oknh tcju xSj dkuwuh rjhds ls mRrjnkrk izfroknh ds jkeyhyk eSnku ds nf{k.k iwoZ fgLls ij tcju dCtk djus dh iz;kl esa yxk gqvk gS ftlds fy;s mlus ekg tuojh lu 2000 ds izFke lIrkg eas vklkekftd rRoksa ds lkFk feydj jkeyhyk eSnku esa yxh gqbZ rkjckM dks pqjk fy;k Fkk bl laca/k esa fn0 30-1-2000 dks mRrjnkrk izfroknh }kjk Fkkuk iqfylpkSdh xqyjHkkst eas izFke lwpuk fjiksZV ns nh xbZ FkkhA fdUrq iqfyl }kjk dksbZ dkuwuh dk;Zokgh u djus ds dkj.k oknh ds gkSlys cqyUn gks x;s og vius izFkko ,oa jktuhfrd lEidZ dk iz;ksx dj tcju jkeyhyk eSnku ij dCtk djus ds iz;kl esa yxk gqvk gSAß As will appear from the pleading of the parties that since from the very initiation of the proceedings, there is a dispute with regard to the area of the school and the area occupied for the purpose of Ramleela. Both the parties have submitted their maps. 28-Ga is the map which shows Ramleela Ground which separates the boundary of the school. The other map submitted by the plaintiff also shows the separate boundary of the School. Ramleela ground has been separately shown in the map. Sri B.C. Pandey, Sr. Advocate has filed a counter affidavit. He has referred the following facts in his counter affidavit: 8. That it is not worthy that at the time of making order dated 30.1.2001 disposing of botha the T.I. application of plaintiff and the defendant the trial court had directed for measurement of the property by commission consequently as per order dated 30.1.2001 contained in annexure 9 of the writ petition Smt. Sushila Mehta executed the commission and submitted her report along with map. That with in the time available to the deponent it is not possible to manage copy of the said report, however the deponent has with him a copy of map filed by Smt. Sushila Mehta Vakil Commissionder clearly showing the Ramlila Ground on the West and Zigyasa School and its field on the east. The premises of Zigyasa Public School consist of main building towards sought and the filed towards its north a copy of said Map is being filed as Annexure S.C.A.-1. 9. That since the petitioner was violating the injunction order dated 30.1.2001 made contructions for which complaints had been given to the District Magistrate as well as to the police on 22.3.2004. At that stage the construction work was in progress and the deponent therefore, prayed for demolition of the constructions made by the petitioner upon the school premises. A copy of contempt petition dated 21.4.2004 which was registered as Misc. Case No. 8 of 2004 is annexed as Annexure S.C.A.-2. 10. That upon the said contempt application u/o 39 rule 2A C.P.C. the trail Court directed for inspection and report of the spot by Advocate commissioner Sri Vinod Joshi, his report filed by petitioner as Annexure 13 with the writ petition. The report was not only factually incorrect, the deponent filed objection dated 9.8.2004. A copy whereof is annexed as Annexure SCA-3. 11. That thereuon the trail court did not confirm the said commissioners report and issued fresh commission. Second commission was executed by Sri Sahid Hussain Advocate Commissioner. A copy of commission report along with map is filed as Annexure S.C.A.-4. 12. That the said commission report of sri Sahid Hussain is paper no. 126 ga in the records of trail Court and is referred as paper no. 126ga. The petitioner has deliberately suppressed this document and practiced a fraud upon this Hon’ble Court by filing Annexure 13 instead. 13. That during pendency of the contempt application the deponent filed another application under section 151 C.P.C. which is filed by the petitioner as annexure 11 to his application, it is on this application the impugned order has been passed. A perusal of the record shows that there is an application under Order 39 Rule 2 C.P.C. pending before the Court below. The report of the Commissioner dated 5.7.2004 has also been annexed. The relevant paragraphs from the report are quoted below: jke yhyk eSnku dh if”peh iwohZ o nf{k.kh lhek ij iqjkuh uho ij nhoky cuh gqbZ gS nf{k.kh nhokj ls ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy ls yxh gqbZ gS djhc 4-5 fQV mph dqN nwjh rd fufeZr gS ftlesa ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dk yksgs dk xsV ckgj tkus vkus gsrq yxk gS xsV ds if”pe dh vksj ckgj ,d [kks[kk iku dk iM+k gqvk gS jkeyhyk eSnku ds iwoZ esa [kMUtk if”pe esa xks”kkyk jksM nf{k.k esa [kMUtk ckn vcknh rFk ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dk Hkou o izkxa.k gS rFkk jkeyhyk eSnku ds Hkhrj flesUV dk xMk ihyj VwVk gqvk lrg ds cjkcj fn[k jgk gS ftls uD”kk utjh esa n”kkZ;k x;k gSA fookfnr Lfky ij ekSdk evk;uk ls Kkr gqvk fd jke yhyk eSnku ds nf{k.kh fn”kk dh vksj tks nhoky 4-5 fQV mWph cukbZ xBZ gS og iqjkuh uho ij gh fufeZr dh xbZ gS tks ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy dh mRrjh lhek rFkk jkeyhyk eSnku dh nf{k.kh lhek dgykrh gS rRi”pkr ftKklk ifCyd Ldwy fufeZr gSA Proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2 C.P.C. are still pending and in that proceedings the Vakil Commissioners submitted the report dated 21.9.2004. The relevant paragraphs in that report are quoted below: fookfnr LFky ds iwjc rjQ B fcUnq rd cuh R.C.C nhokj ds ckn yxHkx 3-5 QqV dh nhokjsa B-C yxHkx QqV rFkk yxHkx 25 QqV rFkk B-F yxHkx 30 QqV rFkk D-G nhokjsa bZVks ls cuh gSA D-F ds chp dh nwjh Hkh yxHkx 25 QqV gSA C-D fcUnqvksa ds chp dh eki yxHkx 45 QqV gS blds Bhd chpksachp ,d frjNk iVy cuk gS ftl ij rjkbZ dyk laxe Jh jkeyhyk eap fy[kk gSA o bl ykbu ds Bhd uhps chp esa “kadjth dk fp= cuk gSA bl frjNs iVy ds nksuksa vkSj pkj pkj LVSIl dh nks lhf<;kW eap ij p<us o mrjus gsrq cuh gSA D-G nhokj ls tqMh gqbZ blh eki dh nhokjsa G-H o E-I cuh gS tks jkeyhyk eap o blls layXu d{k esa Åij rd feVVh Hkjh gS ftlesa FkksMh ?kkl Hkh gS o gYdk lk cjlkrh ikuh Hkjk gSA iwohZ R.C.C nhokj o jkeyhyk eap rFkk mlds lkFk layXUk d{k ds Bhd ihNs iwjc B-G-F fcUnqvksa ds chp dk Hkkx tehu rd IykLVj fd;k gqvk gSA [kaMtk jkLrk ds eksM ij S fcUnq ls nf”kZr lR; ukjk;.k dh nqdku gS tgkW ls H fcUnq rd bZVks dh iqjkuh nhokj cuh gSA Þjkeyhyk izkax.k esa [kMh bl nhokj o deyk tks”kh ds Hkou ds chp dk LFky [kkyh gS rFkk deyk tks”kkh ds edku ls yxh iqjkuh bZVksa dh uhoa fn[kkbZ ns jgh gS bl [kkyh LFky esa dwMk djdV iMk gSA deyk tks”kh ds Hkou ds ckn xkS”kkyk jksM ls yxrh gqbZ /kjkry ds lery pyh vk jgh uhao ij Hkh ,d lhesUVsM R.C.C fiyj [kMk gSA ;g uhao /kekZuan ds edku ds lkFk 90 fMxzh dk dks.k cukrh gqbZ iwjc fn”kk esa eqM tkrh gS rFkk ;gkW ls iqu%90 fMxzh ds dks.k ij mRrj fn”kk esa yxHkx 10 QqV pydj iqu 90 fMxzh ds dks.k ij eqM tkrh gS ;gkW dksus ls djhc 5 QqV dh nwjh ij bl uhao es pkj QqV mpkW R.C.C lhesUVsM fiyj yxHkx 3 x3 bap dk [kMk gSA ;g uhao y{eh nsoh ds ?kj ds vkaxu ls yxrh gqbZ n;k”kadj ds ?kj ds lkeus rd vk jgh gS ;gkW ds ckn ls ;g uhao dhpM ikuh ds dkj.k fn[kkbZ ugh ns jgh gSA n;k”kadj ds ?kj rFkk jkeyhyk xsV ds if”peh fiyj ds chp Hkh ,d ,lh izdkj dk pkj QqV ÅpkW R.C.C flesUVsM fiyj [kMk gSA fiyj ds Bhd ckn ls jkeyhyk xsV ds if”peh fiyj ij pkj QqV ÅWph R.C.C dh nhokjsa IykLVj ;qDr o pwuk dh gqbZ [kMh gSAß It is not in dispute that the Ramleela is being staged by the petitioner earlier also in pursuance of the order dated 30.1.2001. The report of the commissioner dated 21.9.2004 cannot be a ground for altering the order at the time when Ramleela is going to start. The Court below has not indicated that any change has been made by the petitioner so as to encroach the land of the school. The same is subject matter of dispute in proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure. From the copy of the plaint it appears that the plaintiff himself apprehended at the time of filing of the suit and thereafter by order of the court Ramleela was being staged. In the written statement and in the Counter claim the right of the plaintiff has been denied over the land and was alleged to have been earmarked for Ramleela. Any injunction at this moment will not only be violative of religious spirit but also will detrimental to the public at large who has been looking forward for Darshan of Lord Ram and Sita. By showing the Ram Leela, the spirit and character of the students of the school will enlarged and there will be a teaching to the students on the subject i.e. Ram Charit Manas. The teachings of Goswami Tulsi Das which are being performed by way of Ram Leela should be made compulsory in all the schools and colleges so that the students may get themselves acquinted with Lord Rama who is known as symbol of truth. Goswami Tulsidas has said in Ramcharit Manas as under: ukeq jke dks dyir: dfy dY;ku fuoklqA tks lqfejr Hk;ks ekWx ys rqylh rqylhnkl AA jke uke ujdsljh dudfliq dfydky A tkid tu izgykn ftfe ikfyfg nfy lqjlky AA In the case Commr. H.R.E.vs. L.T. Swamiar, AIR 1954 SC 282, the Apex Court has held as under: “We now come to Art. 25 which, as its landguage indicates, secures to every person, subject to public order, health and morality, a freedom not only to entertain such religious belief, as may be approved of by his judgment and conscience, but also to exhibit his belief in such outward acts as he thinks proper and to propagate or disseminate his ideas for the edification of others. ************************************ Religion is certainly a matter of faith with individuals or communities and it is not necessarily theistic. There are well known religious in India like Buddhism and Jainism which do not believe in God or in any Intelligent First Cause. A religion undoubtedly has its basis in a system of beliefs or doctrines which are regarded by those who profess that religion as conducive to their spiritual well being, but it would not be correct to say that religion is nothing else but a doctrine or belief. A religion may not only lay down a code of ethical rules for its followers to accept it might prescribe rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are regarded as integral parts or religion, and these forms and observances might extend even to matters of food and dress.” In the words of Sat Sai Baba- “There is nothing greater than having love for God. Love is God and through love alone you can merge in God.” In the words of Swami Vivekanand- izR;sd tho ,d ,d rkjk gS vkSj ;s lkjs rkjs bZ”oj:ih “kk”or vkdk”k ds uhys foeku esa tMs gq, gSaA ogha ij lcdh tMsa lek;h gqbZ gSa lcdh lRrk vkSj lcdk ;FkkFkZ O;fDRo okLro esa ogh ij gSA buesa ls tks dqN rkjs gekjs f{kfrt dks ikj dj pys x;s Fks mUgh dh [kkst esa /keZ dk ikjEHk gqavk vkSj mu lcdks bZ”oj esa ikus esa rFkk vius dks ogh vofLFkr ns[kus esa mldk vUr gqvkA Consequently the Court below is directed to decide the suit within a period of three months. While deciding the suit, the court below shall get the measurement of the area of the school from the settlement map and other relevant record, like title deeds etc. showing the actual measurement where the school is running and further the Court below shall get the land of Ram Leela bifurcated. In view of the above, the order dated 5.10.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Udham Singh Nagar is set aside. The parties are directed to abide the order dated 30.1.2001 for a period of three months only. The suit is also directed to be decided by that time. However, it is made clear that if any pucca stage etc. has been prepared, the same shall be subject to the final result of the suit. The petitioner undertakes to abide by the result of the suit. Consequently the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 5.10.2004 is set aside. The respondents are directed not to interfere in the running of the Ram Leela of the petitioner.No order as to costs. Copy expedite. (Rajesh Tandon J.) 13.10.2004 *Dhyani