Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/539/2010 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 539 of 2010
========================================================
VINODKUMAR
SHIVSHANKER SEVAK - Petitioner(s)
Versus
MANAGERSHRI
DAKORE TEMPLE & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NK MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2,2.2.2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2,2.2.2
MR RS
SANJANWALA for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR
BA SURTI for Respondent(s) : 2.2.1,2.2.2
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 04/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of filing this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order
dated 07.10.2009 passed below exhibit 27 and 40 by the learned
Principal District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad, in Civil Misc. Application
NO.138 of 2007 whereby the learned Judge has rejected the Exhibits.
27 and 40, filed by the present petitioner.
2. Heard
the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The Courts below while
considering the application exhibit 27 and 40 has considered the
evidence as well as the documents on record and mainly in paragraph
No.9 the Court has observed as under:-
It is undisputed
fact that in 1906 the privy council formulated the scheme and rules
framed by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay for the better
administration of the Dakore Temple Committee. Also the opponent No.1
is manager of the Dakore Temple Committee and opponent No.2 is
representative of Shri Gol Sevak Panch, herein this petition the
validity of the rule 30 and 43 not brought to the challenge. Only
implementation is followed or not I.e. only question for
consideration. Mark 3/1 is the xerox copy of the scheme of Dakore
Temple committee, rule 30 which English translation version is under
the list at exh. 26/7 which runs as follows:-
Shrigol and
Khedaval Sevaks shall, by turns, perform seva Puja every day, on Shri
Ranchhodraiji Maharaj and Shri Gopallaji Maharaj following the
prevailing custom. And Tapodhan Sevaks shall kepp, in their custody
the keys of the padlocks to their Nij Mandir. In accordance with the
practice now in vogue Shrigod Sevaks shall wave Arti before Shri
Ranchhodraji likewise they shall prepare and give all samagri
connected with Raj Bog on the occasion of Raj Bog as well as that
prepared on behalf of the Bhandar as stated in the Nek.
Thus preparation of Nek
is confined to Raj Bhog and not Mangla Bhog, Bal Bhog,..
The rule 43 runs as
follows:-
The responsibility
with regard to the preparation and delivery in time of the Samagri of
Rajbhog, two or even more than two in number shall be on the shrigod
Sevak.
Thus, the contention
raised by Shri B.T. Patel in regard with the preparation of Nek for
all the Bhog cannot be entertained. The xerox copy of resolution no.
1707 which casting responsibility on shrigod sevak to prepare the
Rajbhog which is also not in dispute. Even resolution no. 361 dated
28.07.2005 wherein it is shown that the responsibility of Shrigod
Sevak Panch to prepare a Nek for all the Bhog as the same is noticed.
But ultimately the scheme approved to be followed in its prospect
under the resolution No.156 dated 16.5.2006. It is clearly passed
i.e. scheme rule 30 and 43 should be implemented which ultimately
implied the repeal resolution no. 361. Thus, in all I do not see any
force in the petition which is required to be dismissed….
3. Learned Advocate for
the petitioner is not able to point out anything from the record to
take a different view of the matter. In view of this, I am complete
agreement with the findings recorded by the Trial Court, the appeal
deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the same is dismissed. Notice is
discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief, if any, stands
vacated.
(K.S.JHAVERI,J.)
pawan
Top