AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the show cause notice dated 08.08.2025, Annexure P-6, and the letter dated 19.08.2025, Annexure P-8, issued by the second respondent/Deputy Commissioner, whereby a committee was constituted under the Chairmanship of Assistant Commissioner (J) to audit the donations received and works done by the Society/Mandir Shivala Shiv Ji Maharaj, Kalanaur, and submit its report within four weeks after conducting the audit. At the same time, the petitioner was directed to provide all records to the committee for this purpose.
Learned counsel contended that the petitioner is a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for short, ‘the 1860 Act’), and a certificate to that effect dated 03.09.2019, Annexure P-1, has been duly issued. He made a reference to the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.1611 of 1999 titled Pran Nath and others v. State of Punjab and others, wherein a matter concerning affairs of the temple - Shivala Shiv Ji Maharaj, which are now being managed by the petitioner Society, was considered. The issues raised were; (i) who is the competent authority to resolve disputes regarding the management and affairs of the properties vested with a religious deity, and (ii) what shall be the procedure to be followed for such adjudicatory process. Examining the same, this Court held that in case of alleged breach of constructive trust created for public purposes within the meaning of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’), the aggrieved parties are entitled to approach the civil court seeking the reliefs like removal or appointment of any trustee, vesting of the property with a trustee, delivery of possession of any trust property, any direction with regard to accounts and inquiry, etc. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to constitute a committee to audit the affairs of the temple/its committee or the works done by it which are essentially of religious and charitable nature. Secondly, it has been contended that after being registered as a Society under the 1860 Act, the temple’s affairs cannot be interfered with by the government by constituting any committee to audit its accounts. In support of the contention, he has relied upon a judgment dated 28.04.2026, rendered by the Delhi High Court in LPA No.321 of 2026 titled All India Football Federation v. Churchill Brothers Sports Club Pvt. Ltd. and another, along with a connected appeal.
On the contrary, learned State counsel submits that the Deputy Commissioner has not interfered with the functioning of the Society as such, and has acted in the light of the judgment and decree dated 05.12.2017, Annexure P-3, passed by the Civil Court, Gurdaspur, in a civil suit filed for removal of certain persons from the Management and settling a scheme for proper management, administration, appointment and removal of trustees, income and expenditure account, maintenance and upkeep of the public temple Shivala Shiv Ji Maharaj.
Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered.
It is apparent on record that the petitioner is a registered Society under the 1860 Act. Its affairs are being managed by the bodies created thereunder. The impugned show cause notices issued by the Deputy Commissioner do not mention any provision of law whereunder the committee to audit the accounts of the Society has been constituted. It does not even make a reference to the civil court judgment, dated 05.12.2017, or any committee constituted thereunder. Learned State counsel is also not in a position to refer to any provision of law under which such notices could have been issued by the Deputy Commissioner seeking records from the Society for conducting its audit. Also, the legal position with regard to managing the affairs of a Society registered under the 1860 Act is very clear which does not permit any interference by the government or any outside agency. No supervisory role has been assigned to any government official or department so far as running of affairs of the Society is concerned, as after registration it gets established as an independent entity.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, this Court finds no justification for issuance of the impugned show cause notices, dated 08.08.2025 and 19.08.2025, and the same are, accordingly, set aside, leaving it open for the respondents to proceed against the Society with respect to any irregularity or illegality committed by it, in accordance with law.
Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.