Varda Ram & Anr vs Uma Ram & Ors on 24 February, 2010

CMA-251/10-Varda Ram & Anr. Vs. Uma Ram & Ors.             Judgment dt.24.2.10

                                      1/4


                S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.251/2010
                 Varda Ram & Anr. Vs. Uma Ram & Ors.

Date of order                    :                24th February, 2010

                               PRESENT

            HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

Dr. A.A. Bhansali for the appellants.

Mr. Surendra Surana ) for the respondents.
Mr. Shital Kumbhat )

                                     -------

1.           From the averments in the CMA and after hearing

learned counsels at some length, it appears that there are rival claims

for the management of registered public trust known as Shri Gautam

Rishi Trust Meen aSamaj Gyarah Pargana, Sirohi, Pali and Jalor. The

said public trust is registered and its registration number is

03/07/Sirohi.



2.           The appellants before this Court Varda Ram and Maga

Ram claimed to have been elected as President and Treasurer of the

said Trust in the election held on 23.2.2009 whereas the respondent

submitted that no election was held on 23.2.2009 but due and proper

elections were held on 15.6.2009 and 16.6.2009 and the respondents

were elected as office bearers of the said public trust.



3.           In the suit filed by the present appellants an application

for temporary injunction was also filed which has come to be rejected
 CMA-251/10-Varda Ram & Anr. Vs. Uma Ram & Ors.            Judgment dt.24.2.10

                                     2/4


by the learned District Judge, Sirohi by the impugned order dated

19.2.2010.



4.              The Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department,

Jodhpur was also approached in the matter under Section 23 of the

Act wherein the learned Assistant Commissioner also passed certain

directions for constitution of the Committees of the respondents and

present appellant Varda Ram and one Sona Ram were also directed to

be included in the Committee for framing the new Constitution of the

said trust.



5.              From the facts, it appears that there are rival claims

between the two groups in the suit for management of the said public

trust of Meena community.



6.              In the opinion of this Court, there are adequate

provisions in the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 to deal with such

situation where the rival claims of the parties for management of

public trust can be decided by the learned Assistant Commissioner

under Section 38 of the Act and further the Court can be approached

through       the   learned   Assistant    Commissioner    of    Devasthan

Department as provided under Section 38 of the Act. The further

provisions in this regard are enshrined under Section 39 and 40 of the

Act. Section 38 of the Act reads as under:-
 CMA-251/10-Varda Ram & Anr. Vs. Uma Ram & Ors.         Judgment dt.24.2.10

                                   3/4




             "38. Application for directions.- (1) If the Assistant
             Commissioner, on the application of any person having
             interest in a public trust or otherwise is satisfied after
             making such inquiry as he thinks necessary that-
                   (a) the original object of the public trust has
                        failed;
                   (b) the trust property is not being property
                        managed or administered; or
                   (c) the directions of the court is necessary for the
                        administration of the public trust;
             he may, after giving the working trustee an opportunity
             of being heard, direct such working trustee or any other
             trustee or person having interest, in the trust to apply to
             the court for directions within such time not exceeding
             thirty day as may be specified by the Assistant
             Commissioner.
             (2) If the working trustee or any other trustee or person
             having interest in the trust so directed fails to make an
             application as required, or if there is no trustee of the
             public trust, or if, for any other reason, the Assistant
             Commissioner reconsiders it expedient to do so , he shall
             himself make an application to the Court."



7.           Therefore, while keeping the said suit pending, the rival

claimant groups present before this Court are relegated before the

learned Assistant Commissioner, Devasdthan Department, Jodhpur

and the order already passed by him on 5.10.2009 is set aside and he

is directed to hear all the concerned parties and rival claims of the
 CMA-251/10-Varda Ram & Anr. Vs. Uma Ram & Ors.         Judgment dt.24.2.10

                                   4/4


parties and decide the same in accordance with Section 38 of the Act.

The parties in the first instance may present before the learned

Assistant Commissioner on 15th March, 2010 and after hearing all the

parties, the learned Assistant Commissioner shall decide the rival

claims of the parties of the said public trust in accordance with law.



8.            With these observations this appeal is disposed of.



9.            Till the next date fixed before the learned Assistant

Commissioner, the status quo as it exists today shall be maintained

and thereafter the management of the said trust would be governed by

the further interim order or by way of direction as the case may be

passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner.

                                         [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J.

item No.s/5
babulal/