The Supreme Court passed the judgment related to the interpretation of the provisions of Section 6(1)(viii) of the Nanded Act 1956 in the matter of Sadar Bahginder Singh v. Sadar Manjieeth Singh.
Brief Facts of the Case
On 28th December 1951, the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwas Association Society (Diwan) was registered under the Hyderabad Societies Registration Act.
On 11th January 1982, the certificate of registration was issued to the aforesaid trust. The Certificate became the origin of the dispute between the conflicting parties. On 22nd January 2014, the 2 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court set aside the matter stating that the conflict is in the membership. The controversy in the case stands in the nomination of the 4 members with regard to Section 6(1)(viii) of the Nanded Act, 1956.
Due to the conflicting allegations between the parties related to the nomination, the matter came before the High Court challenging the validity of the notification which nominated the 4 members to the board u/s 6(1)(viii). The High Court held that as per section 6, the government doesn’t have the power to nominate the member of the Diwan, who would represent the statutory government except the Diwan himself.
Arguments Before the Court
The appellant had challenged the appointment of members which was done by the government, on the ground that the first respondent was not the trustee of the Diwan as he was removed from the said post by the working committee. It was contended that the High Court did not give any clear justification with regard to prohibit the notification of the Government accepting the nomination of 4 members u/s 6(1)(viii).
The respondent submitted that as per section 2(18) of the MTP Act the first respondent is still a trustee and had the locus standi to move a petition before the High Court under art. 226 of the Constitution of India. The contesting respondents had challenged the plea of the appellants about the management of the trust.
Court’s Observation
The court observed that the conflicting claims between both the parties also included the alleged removal of the first respondent from the post of trustee of the Diwan. The court said the question lay with the interpretation of Section 6(1)(viii). Section 6(1)(viii) clearly states that the power to nominate the four members is vested in Diwan and not with the State government.
Court’s Decision
The court held that in order to nominate four members of the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded, section 6(1)(viii) of the Act, it gives the authority to the collective body of members of the Diwan who are entitled to select those four members to be nominated to the statutory Board. The court also stated that the process must be completed within three months from the date of this judgment. Moreover, all the appeals were disposed of by the court.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgement from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
