CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.12591 OF 1993 ===== In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ===== 1. Srishri Thakur Ram Chandra, Lakshmi Narayan, Shri Krishna Bhagwan Thakurbari Gram-Betari, P.S. & District Bhabua through its sebaite Shri prem Nath Mehrotra 2. Prem Nath Mehrotra son of late Jagnath Prasad Mehrotra, resident of village Betri, P.S. Bhabua, District Bhabua Sebait-Shri Thakur Ram Chandra Lakshmi Narayan, Shri Krishna Bhagwan Thakurbari. ------- Petitioners 1. The State of Bihar 2. Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Board through its Administrator 3. Administrator, Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna 800001 ----------- Respondents ===== For the petitioners: Mr Kamal Nayan Choubey, Senior Advocate And Mr. Sidharth Harsh For the State : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar,SC-16 And Mr.Rajeev Kumar,JC to SC 16 For Respondent nos.2 and 3: Mr. R.C.Thakur ===== P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J. Vide order dated 2.12.1993 issued by the then Administrator of Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Board, a scheme was formulated and an ad hoc committee constituted to take care of day-to-day working of the trust. Petitioner by way of the present writ application challenged the said order to be not only illegal but even beyond the competence of the authority. The reason for such 2 stand is that the trust in question is a private trust and the Act does not empower the administrator to interfere with the affairs of the trust. 2. When the writ application was taken up for admission on 20.1.1994 a Bench of this Court was pleased to order status quo with regard to order in question. A question mark was put on the notification contained in annexure-2 and its enforcement. The writ application remained pending for years and it has finally taken up for hearing only now. 3. Serious challenge has been thrown on the legality of the impugned order as many grounds including the fact that the order was in breach of principle of natural justice and the administrator did not have the requisite valid authority. With no serious rebuttal on the above submission annexure-2 dated 2.12.1993 is quashed. 4. The writ application is allowed with an observation that if the respondent authority, the Bihar Religious Trust Board, would still like to exercise authority with regard to the present trust they will have to first satisfy themselves that it is not a private trust and the situation still 3 prevails where intervention may be required by way of invoking authority within the ambit of the Act. 5. The writ is allowed as above. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J) PATNA HIGH COURT Dated: 5.12.2008 AI/NAFR