C.R.No.819 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.819 of 2009
Date of Decision:08.05.2009.
Dera Baba Jaggaji Guru Granth Sahib ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents.
CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.D.Anand.
Present: Mr. Ramesh K. Dhiman, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. H.S.Gill, DAG, Punjab.
*****
S.D.Anand, J. (ORAL)
Certain land belonging to the Gurudwara Dera Baba Jaggaji
Guru Granth Sahib had been acquired and the compensation came to be
deposited in the Court. Initially, when the matter was taken up on
25.01.2008, a Coordinate Bench (Pritam Pal, J.) of this Court, while
disposing of C.M.No.45-CI of 2008 in RFA No.3255 of 2007 (Annexure P-
3), directed the learned Executing Court to disburse the amount of
enhanced compensation, including the severance charges, subject to the
furnishing of adequate security to the satisfaction of the Executing Court
“for the due performance of the order which may ultimately be binding upon
them.” In the light of that order, the Coordinate Bench directed the release
from attachment of the relevant account which the petitioner before this
Court held at the Union Bank of India. The attachment of that account had
been ordered by the Executing Court, vide order dated 10.12.2007.
After passing of the above order dated 25.01.2008, the amount
came to be deposited. Vide order dated 02.05.2008, the Executing Court
noticed that there was no stay order restraining disbursement of that
amount and directed disbursement thereof to the petitioner before this
Court on filing of bonds of double amount.
On 05.05.2008, the bonds were furnished by the petitioner before
C.R.No.819 of 2009 2
the Executing Court which noticed, in the impugned order, the factum of
acceptance thereof. However, it proceeded to direct that the amount in
question shall be deposited in the FDR in the name of the petitioner at the
Gharuan Branch of the Punjab National Bank. It further ordered that “the
Management Committee will be entitled to collect the interest accruing on
the same every quarter for the management and welfare of the Gurudwara
in question.” Besides ordering that the petitioner-Gurudwara shall
“maintain the account books of the expenditure and income of the
Gurudwara in question,” it was directed that the account books
shall be subject to occasional inspection by that Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the grant of order
dated 05.05.2008 was in complete derogation of the order dated
25.01.2008 passed by this Court. It is also the plea that once the
disbursement of the amount had been ordered, the Executing Court could
not have retraced and directed the disbursement only of the interest part
thereof.
It is apparent from the above discussion that the impugned order
deserves to be invalidated because it is in derogation of the order dated
25.01.2008 passed by a Coordinate Bench (Pritam Pal, J.) of this Court in
C.M.No.45-CI of 2008 in RFA No.3255 of 2007 (Annexure P-3). There was
also no justification on the part of the learned Executing Court, to have
ordered that “the account books of the expenditure and income of the
Gurudwara in question would be subject to occasional inspection by this
Court.”
In the light of above discussion, the petition shall stand allowed in
toto. The order dated 02.05.2008 shall be implemented by the learned
Executing Court.
May 08, 2009. (S.D.Anand) vinod Judge