Judgment K.B.N.SINGH, J. 1. In this writ application, the Prabandhak Committee of Shree Takht Hari Manderji, Patna City, through its Secretary, Petitioner No. 2, has prayed for a declaration that Shree Guru Govind Singh College, Patna City, is a denominational institution and for quashing the order of the Magadh University, constituting an ad hoc committee for the Management of the College, contained in Annexure-17 as also for issuing necessary directions restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners right to function as a duly constituted Governing Body of the College and to administer and manage the College in accordance with the wishes and the proposals of the founders and sponsors of the College. 2. The aforesaid relief is founded on the following facts stated in the writ application. Shree Guru Govind Singh, the founder of the Khalsa and the Tenth Guru of the Sikhs, was born in ancient town of Patna City, commonly known as the Patna Saheb, and the birth place of the said Guru is taken to be a place of pilgrimage by the followers of Sikhism all over the world and the famous Takht Shri Hari Manderji (hereinafter referred to as the Takht) has been established and maintained as an institution for religious and charitable purposes by the religious denomination of Sikhs, who maintain the affairs of the said Takht through a Committee, known as the Prabandhak Committee of the said Takht. This Committee is constituted in accordance with the rules framed under the constitution of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht duly approved by the District Judge of Patna. The Prabandhak Committee so constituted, holds office for a period of five years, with the General Secretary as its executive head, and with District Judge of Patna, as its ex officio Chairman. It is alleged that the Sikhs of India constitute an independent religious denomination and are a religious minority and have their own independent culture and language, Punjabi, in Gurumukhi script, which is the language and script of the Guru Granth Saheb, the sacred religious book of Sikhs, which contains the teachings of the Ten Sikh Gurus. It is also alleged that the Sikhs are also a linguistic minority. 3. It is also alleged that the Sikhs are also a linguistic minority. 3. The Sikhs, with a view to preserve and conserve their language, culture and religion, have been establishing and maintaining Gurudwaras, temples of worship and other institutions for religious and charitable purposes, including educational institutions, all over the world. It is also alleged that it has been the cherished desire of the Sikh community to establish an educational institution to impart education up to degree and post-graduate standards in the memory of Tenth Guru, Shri Govind Singh at his birth place, Patna City. Accordingly, in the 42nd All India Sikh Educational Conference, held at Patna on the 2nd and 3rd January, 1960, in the premises of the Takht, in which Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia, the then Deputy Defence Minister of India and other prominent Sikhs of the country participated, a unanimous decision was taken to establish a College in the name of Shree Guru Govind Singh and the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee was authorised to take up the question of establishing a college in the name of the said Guru. It was also resolved to request the Government to make available 50 acres of land near the Patna City Railway Station. A copy of the said resolution has been filed as Annexure-1. On the 4th January, 1960, a meeting of the prominent Sikhs, residents of this State, was convened by the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, in the premises of the Gurudwara, which was also attended by the representatives of the Sikh Educational Conference, in which it was resolved that a College be established in the name of the said Guru, and a Board of Trustees was constituted for the said purpose, with Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia as President and Sardar Arjan Singh and Sardar Budh Singh as members of the Trust. A Land Sub-Committee of ten members and a Finance Sub-Committee of 16 members were also formed in the said meeting. The participants of the meeting contributed and promised a sum of Rs. 50,000, the money required to be deposited as security for affiliation of the said College and also agreed to make further contributions as and when required to meet the expenses on establishment, administration and maintenance of the College. A sum of Rs. 21,000 was contributed out of the funds of the Takht and another sum of Rs. 50,000, the money required to be deposited as security for affiliation of the said College and also agreed to make further contributions as and when required to meet the expenses on establishment, administration and maintenance of the College. A sum of Rs. 21,000 was contributed out of the funds of the Takht and another sum of Rs. 21,000 was donated by the Patna Transport owners, who were mainly Sikhs, and a sum of Rs. 15,000 was donated by the Patna City Punjabi Cloth Sellers, who are also mainly Sikhs. It is alleged that Dr. Dukhan Ram, the then Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University who had participated in the 42nd Session of the All-India Sikh Educational Conference as an invitee, and also attended the meeting held on the 4th January, 1960, also made a donation of Rs. 250. A copy of the proceedings of the said meeting dated the 4th January, 1960, which was in Punjabi, transliterated into Devanagri script, has been filed as Annexure-2. The Trustees and Members of the Prabandhak Committee and the Sikh people in a meeting held on the 4th January, 1960, constituted a Governing Body of 11 members, with Sardar Lakhmir Singh as President and Sardar Arjan Singh as the Secretary. 4. The College was granted affiliation by the Bihar University in the year 1960, and when the Bihar State Universities Act, 1961, came into force, the College had affiliation for some time with the Patna University and after the Patna University Act, 1962, the College was granted affiliation by the Magadh University, and since then it is an affiliated College of the Magadh University. Initially the College was located in the premises of the Gurudwara and thereafter, steps were taken for purchase of land for the College by the Takht, for which funds were raised from the Sikh community of the State and also outside coming as Sikh Pilgrims. Some funds were also received from philanthropic persons. Thus, the land of the College was purchased and the buildings constructed by the funds created by the Takht and the furniture etc. were also purchased out of the said fund. The College also received a sum of Rs. 1,000 per month from the funds of the Takht Committee and received small grants from the University and the State of Bihar. were also purchased out of the said fund. The College also received a sum of Rs. 1,000 per month from the funds of the Takht Committee and received small grants from the University and the State of Bihar. The total contribution by way of grants paid to the College by the Takht Committee amounts to Rs. 1,46,724.40, besides the sum of Rs. 21,000, contributed to the College by the Takht Committee as security deposit for its affiliation and the amounts contributed by the said Committee for the purchase of the land and construction of the buildings for the College. It is the petitioners case that the College was established by contributions and donations of people professing Sikh religion, including the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht and small amounts were received as donations from some philanthropic persons interested in education. 5. The first Governing Body of the College, in a meeting held on the 24th April, 1960, in Room No. 25 of the Takht, constituted various Committees for raising funds for the College and in this matter services of the Members of the Prabandhak Committee and prominent Sikh citizens were obtained. After the establishment of the College, the Governing Body of the College accepted the proposal of the Secretary of the College (Annexure-3) to associate the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht with the administration of the College. The proposal of the Secretary contained a condition that all members of the Governing Body except the ex officio members, would be appointed with the concurrence of the Prabandhak Committee and the advice of the Prabandhak Committee would be binding on the Governing Body of the College. It is also stated that the Governing Body of the College in the meeting held on the 22nd August, 1960, resolved to appeal to the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht to treat the College as a part of the Takht and to undertake responsibility for its proper maintenance. It also contained a proposal that the Governing Body would accept three donor-members on the Governing Body as recommended by the Prabandhak Committee, on acceptance of the proposal of the Governing Body (Annexure-4). The Prabandhak Committee accepted the aforesaid proposal; the arrangements in respect of administration of the College worked satisfactorily and the Governing Body of the College was always appointed with the approval of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht. 6. The Prabandhak Committee accepted the aforesaid proposal; the arrangements in respect of administration of the College worked satisfactorily and the Governing Body of the College was always appointed with the approval of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht. 6. It is asserted that ever since the College is being administered as a minority denominational institution, having due regard to the provisions of the Bihar State Universities Act, and the Magadh University Act and Rules, Regulations and Statutes framed thereunder, so far as they are applicable to the minority institutions, and did not contravene Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India and the University never interfered with the right of administration of the minority community of Sikhs inasmuch as, even under the Statutory powers to nominate the Secretary of the Governing Body of the College, the Vice-Chancellor of the University always nominated a Sikh as its Secretary, and when the rules to elect the office-bearers were applied to the College, persons nominated by the Prabandhak Committee were appointed as the President or the Secretary of the Governing Body of the College and accepted by the University. 7. Apprehending likelihood of encroachment on the fundamental rights of the Sikh community to administer the College, in view of the changes in the Statutory provisions for the constitution of the Governing Bodies of the affiliated Colleges, the Secretary of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, on being authorised by the Prabandhak Committee, addressed a memorandum to the Vice-Chancellor of the Magadh University on the 24th October, 1970, in regard to the right of administration of the College as a minority institution, with a copy to the Education Secretary to the State of Bihar (Annexures-6 and 7), with a prayer to declare it a minority institution, which remained unattended. In view of the changed provision of the Magadh University Act that a person donating one lac of rupees or more to an institution affiliated to the University would be declared a life member of the Senate of the University, the Secretary of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht wrote a letter to the Chancellor of the University that the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, having contributed more than one lac of rupees to the College, was entitled to the privilege of having a life member on the Senate of the University (Annexure-8). 8. 8. According to the petitioners, the first inroad on their right came on the 14.06.1973, when the Governing Body of the College, which had four Sikh members, was superseded and an ad hoc committee consisting of 4 persons, including the Officer on Special Duty. Magadh University the Sub-divisional Officer (Civil), Patna City, Shree Shyamnandan Sinha, Reader, Magadh University, and one representative of the Takht Prabandhak Committee was constituted, vide Annexure-9. The Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, in a meeting held on the 8th July, 1973, characterised the action of the University as arbitrary and resolved that as the Prabandhak Committee was the founder of the College, it should have been consulted before any such Committee was constituted to administer the College and declined to nominate its representative on the ad hoc committee. A copy of the resolution of the Committee (Annexure-10) was forwarded to the Vice-Chancellor of the University. 9. Shree Mulkraj Sharma, a member of the Sikh Community, and Shree Ramji Misra Manohar, a resident of Patna City, challenged the appointment of the ad hoc committee by the Universitys notification dated the 14th June, 1973 (Annexure-9) in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 715 of 1973, which was permitted to be withdrawn on the 26th June, 1973. On the 9th July, 1973, Shree B.S. Dhillon filed Title Suit No. 120 of 1973 in the Court of the First Subordinate Judge, Patna, challenging the aforesaid Notification of the University dated the 14th June, 1973 (Annexure-9), and praying for a permanent injunction against the officers of the University and the members of the ad hoc committee. A temporary injunction was granted, which was ultimately vacated on the 25th September, 1973, and an appeal filed against that order was also dismissed by the District Judge of Patna on the 6th February, 1974. 10. The Chancellor of the University, with a view to resolve the conflict, called the Vice-Chancellor and the General Secretary of the Prabandhak Committee on the 10th April, 1974, at 11 A. M. for discussion, but that meeting could not be held due to the Vice-Chancellors absence. Thereafter, on the 20th April, 1974, the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht resolved to take all necessary action to protect the interests of the Prabandhak Committee to administer the College, and, to save the College from deterioration, appointed an interim Governing Body to take charge of the administration of the College. Thereafter, on the 20th April, 1974, the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht resolved to take all necessary action to protect the interests of the Prabandhak Committee to administer the College, and, to save the College from deterioration, appointed an interim Governing Body to take charge of the administration of the College. Shree Gyan Singh Purewal, the President of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, was authorised to nominate five members out of the Takht Committee, including an educationist, on the Governing Body, and further resolved that the members coming from other sources should be informed to send their nominations within a week so that the entire Governing Body could be constituted by the 28th April, 1974. A memorandum seeking protection of the rights of the minority to administer the College as guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution, was sent to the Government of Bihar, with a copy to the Vice-Chancellor of the Magadh University (Annexure-13). Ignoring all these protests and repeated memoranda of the Committee of the Takht, the University chose to dissolve the ad hoc committee constituted by Notification dated the 14th June, 1973 (Annexure-9) and by Notification No. 1443/48 dated the 11th May, 1974, reconstituted an ad hoc committee of four persons, of whom 3 belonged to Sikh Community and the 4th, the Sub-divisional Officer, Patna City, who happened to be a Muslim, as the Convenor. However, the Governing Body formed in pursuance of the resolution of the Prabandhak Committee dated the 20th April, 1974 (Annexure-12) is functioning from the 30th of May, 1974 and is in charge of the Management of the College, as stated in paragraph 34 of the writ application, and the University was informed accordingly as per letter dated the 30th May, 1974 (Annexure-14). 11. On the 14.05.1974, the Deputy Secretary to the Governor of Bihar (the Chancellor of the Magadh University), wrote a letter to the Vice-Chancellor, seeking information from him on the subject and in reply the Vice-Chancellor wrote that he had appointed the Registrar of the University to enquire into the representations of the General Secretary of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht. In the meanwhile, some agreement was arrived at between the representatives of the teachers of the affiliated Colleges of the State of Bihar on the one hand and the State Government on the other on the 7th May, 1974 (Annexure-16), agreeing to convert all the affiliated colleges into constituent Colleges and awaiting such conversion agreed to appoint an ad hoc committee consisting of a representative each of the State Government, the University and the Teachers and the Principal (ex officio) and a donor of category I. Accordingly, an ad hoc committee, (was appointed) consisting of (1) Shree P. S. Kohili, I.A.S., a Government representative, (2) Dr. L. N. Gupta, a University representative, (3) the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht as a donor, (4) the Principal/Officer-in-Charge of the College, and (5) a representative of the Teachers of the College, (vide Annexure-17), with Shree Kohili as the Convenor. (Shree Kohili is also a Member of the Prabandhak Committee). Thereafter, the present writ application has been filed, in which it is also asserted that a Gurudwara, belonging to the Sikhs, is also founded in the premises of the College and regular religious discourses on Sikhism and the teachings of the Great Sikh Gurus are held in the premises of the College, since its establishment, and for the regular Puja of the Granth Saheb, a Granthi has been appointed, who lives in the College premises. 12. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor, Magadh University, denying the assertions made in the writ application. It is asserted in the counter-affidavit that the College was started out of contributions raised from a large number of non-Sikh persons and its sponsors were also members of the public in general and not the Sikh community in particular. After the affiliation of the College, a Governing Body was constituted strictly in accordance with the Statutes of the University of eleven members (Annexure-X) and no claim of its being a minority denominational institution was raised by the Prabandhak Committee, which has been raised for the first time after a number of years. Respondent No. 6, Sardar Balwant Singh, Officiating Principal of the College has also filed a counter-affidavit refuting the petitioners assertion that the College in question was established as a minority institution or administered as such. Respondent No. 6, Sardar Balwant Singh, Officiating Principal of the College has also filed a counter-affidavit refuting the petitioners assertion that the College in question was established as a minority institution or administered as such. Both the University and this respondent filed certain documents (Annexures-X, Y and Z by the University and Annexures-A to H by respondent No. 6), along with their counter-affidavits, which will be referred to in so far as they may be relevant. The petitioners have also filed a reply to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 6, re-asserting the statements made in the writ application and filed Annexures-18 to 22 along with it. The University by a supplementary affidavit corrected certain typing errors in Paragraph 5 of its counter-affidavit. 13. On the 2.09.1974, one Chandradip Narayan Bararia and his brothers and one Ram Avtar Lall, claiming to be donors, filed a petition for being added as respondents in this writ application, so that they may refute the claim of the petitioners. This petition was disposed of by an order dated the 6.09.1974, and it was not considered necessary to add them as respondents. It was, however, observed in the order that they may be heard in accordance with R. 5 of Chapter XXI-C of the Patna High Court Rules, if the Bench hearing the writ application thought it fit to permit them to be heard. It may be mentioned that no independent argument has been advanced by Mr. Kamlapati Singh, who appeared on behalf of the said applicants before us and he has only adopted the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the respondents. 14. Mr. Basanta Chandra Ghose, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has urged that the College being established by the Takht Prabandhak Committee of the Sikhs, it is the Sikh community, a minority community, and its Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, which has the right to administer and manage the same and University has no right to interfere with their right in this regard. The imposition of the ad hoc committee against the will of the Prabandhak Committee under Annexures-10, 15 and 17 are violative of the right of the denominational institutions guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. Mr. The imposition of the ad hoc committee against the will of the Prabandhak Committee under Annexures-10, 15 and 17 are violative of the right of the denominational institutions guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Ghose has relied on Annexures-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in support of his submission that the College in question was established as a denominational institution by the Sikh community under the management and control of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht. 15. Mr. Basudeva Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University and respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 6, has not challenged that the Sikh community is a religious minority in this State, and, in my opinion, rightly. What has been challenged is that the institution has not been established by Sikhs, much less to conserve their language, script or culture, and, as such, it is not a minority institution. Learned counsel mainly placed reliance in support of his submission on Annexures-2 and 3, relied upon by Mr. Ghose, and also on Annexure-D, the application for affiliation of the College, dated the 22nd February, 1960. 16. In view of the submissions made before us, the main question for consideration in this case, therefore is whether the College in question has been established by the Sikh minority community or it has been established to conserve the distinct language, script or culture of the Sikhs, so as to attract the protection guaranteed under Article 30 or 29 of the Constitution, or under both the Articles. 17. The relevant two articles under which protection is claimed, may usefully be reproduced:- "29. (1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same. (2) No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them." "30. (1) All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. (2) The State shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language." 18. (1) All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. (2) The State shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language." 18. As regards the protection claimed under Article 29, it may be stated at the outset that in the documents relied upon by the petitioners, there is no whisper that with a view to preserve and conserve their distinct language, script and culture the College in question has been established by the Sikhs, although tall claim in this regard has been made in this writ application. Even in the application for affiliation dated the 22nd February, 1960 (Annexure-D), seeking affiliation up to the degree standard in Arts, no mention is made with regard to any claim for conserving any distinct language, script or culture of the Sikhs, nor there is any mention of any teaching to be done in the Gurumukhi script and the subjects proposed to be taught are those ordinarily taught in the other Colleges in Bihar. It must, therefore, be held that the petitioners are not entitled to protection under Article 29 of the Constitution of India. It may also be mentioned that Mr. Ghose has not seriously pressed his contention under this Article. The claim of the petitioners in Paragraph 41 of the writ application of having a Gurudwara and a Granthi in the College premises seems to be an afterthought to lend support to their alleged claim under Article 29. It has been denied by respondent No. 6 in Paragraph 34 of his counter-affidavit and asserted that as a matter of fact, there is a Kali Asthan in the College premises, and Saraswati Puja is also held in the College. 19. It is well established that the right guaranteed to the minority under Articles 29 and 30 creates two separate rights, although, as observed in the case of W. Proost V/s. The State of Bihar ( AIR 1969 SC 465 ), they may meet in a given case. 19. It is well established that the right guaranteed to the minority under Articles 29 and 30 creates two separate rights, although, as observed in the case of W. Proost V/s. The State of Bihar ( AIR 1969 SC 465 ), they may meet in a given case. The right under Article 29 is a general protection given to a minority to conserve its language, script or culture while the right under Article 30 is a special right to the minority to establish educational institution of its choice uninhibited by considerations germane to application of Article 29. Reference may also be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of St. Xaviers College V/s. The State of Gujarat ( AIR 1974 SC 1389 ). The right of the minority community to administer is available only in respect of institutions which they establish, as will be apparent from the following observations made by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of S. Azeez Basha V/s. The Union of India ( AIR 1968 SC 662 ):- "We are of opinion that for the purpose of Article 30 (1) the word means to bring into existence, and so the right given by Article 30 (1) to the minority is to bring into existence an educational institution and if they do so, to administer it." The question, therefore, that falls for consideration is whether the College in question has been established by the Sikh minority? The question apparently appearing to be simple is not one of easy determination. 20. The documents relied upon by Mr. Ghose in support of his submission that the College was established by the Sikh community need now be referred to. The first document Annexure-1, is a copy of the resolution passed at the 42nd All-India Sikh Educational Conference, held in Patna City on the 2nd and 3rd January, 1960 (as stated in Paragraph 7 of the writ application). The relevant portion of the resolution runs as follows:- "This session of the 42nd All-India Sikh Educational Conference resolves that the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Takhat Sri Har Manderji, should take up the question of establishing and running a College. For the above purpose the Government of Bihar be requested to make available 50 acres of land near the Railway Station of Patna city." (Emphasis is mine). For the above purpose the Government of Bihar be requested to make available 50 acres of land near the Railway Station of Patna city." (Emphasis is mine). This resolution was proposed by Gyani Gurumukh Singh Musaffir, P. M., and seconded by Sardar Jaswant Singh and Dr. Dukhan Ram, Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University. From the above resolution, it is apparent that the 42nd All India Sikh Educational Conference resolved that the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee of the Takht should take up the question of establishing and running a College. According to the petitioners, on the 4th of January, 1960, a meeting of the prominent Sikh residents of the State was convened by the Prabandhak Committee and the same was attended by representatives of the Sikh Educational Conference also. Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia, the President of the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht, was also present. In that meeting it was resolved to establish a College in the name of Shri Guru Govind Singhji and a Board of Trustees was also constituted for the purpose with Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia, the President of the Committee, and Sardar Arjan Singh, the General Secretary of the Committee, and Sardar Budh Singh of Giridih, as Members and a Land Sub-Committee consisting of ten members was also formed. The participants in the meeting contributed and promised on the spot the sum of Rupees 50,000, required to be deposited as security for affiliation of the College and also agreed to make further contributions as and when required to meet the expenses of the establishment and maintenance of the College. In the said meeting a sum of Rs. 21,000 was contributed out of the funds of the Takht, another sum of Rs. 21,000 was contributed by the Patna Transport Owners, who are mainly Sikhs, and a sum of Rs. 15,000 was donated by the Patna City Punjabi Cloth Sellers. Besides that, contributions and donations were also made by several persons, mostly Sikhs. Dr. Dukhan Ram, the then Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University, who also attended the meeting as an invitee, donated a sum of Rs. 250. A copy of the proceedings of the said meeting in Punjabi language transcribed in Deonagri script, has been filed as Annexure-2, which also supports the averments made by the petitioners in this regard. The authenticity of these two documents have not been challenged by Mr. Basudeva Prasad, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 250. A copy of the proceedings of the said meeting in Punjabi language transcribed in Deonagri script, has been filed as Annexure-2, which also supports the averments made by the petitioners in this regard. The authenticity of these two documents have not been challenged by Mr. Basudeva Prasad, appearing on behalf of the respondents. But what he has urged is that Dr. Dukhan Ram, Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University, was one of the seconders of the resolution (Annexure-1). The fact that Dr. Dukhan Ram was one of the seconders of the resolution (Annexure-1) will not make much difference, in view of the fact that he, in the capacity of the Vice-Chancellor, was invited and also seconded the resolution adopted at the said conference, perhaps, to add weight to the resolution. The conference was of Sikhs and mere participation by some non-Sikhs will not change the character of the conference. The criticism of Mr. Prasad in regard to Annexure-2 is that in the meeting held on the 4th January, 1960, at the Takht of the Prabandhak Committee, some non-Sikhs also participated, such as Ramji Misra Manohar of Patna City, (Sl. No. 18 of Annexure-2), though mentioned as a Sardar is not a Sardar. It is also contended that in the Finance Sub-Committee also, Serial No. 16, Pandit Mulkraj Sharma is not a Sikh. This position is controverted. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of Mulkraj Sharma, stating that he is a Sikh. Another criticism made against this document is that contribution was admittedly given by Dr. Dukhan Ram, the then Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University, who participated in the meeting as a special invitee. But the fact remains that the 42nd All India Sikh Educational Conference in a meeting held at the Takht, predominantly consisting of Sikhs, had resolved to establish Shri Guru Govind Singh College. This was merely a follow up action in pursuance of the resolution (Annexure-1) of the Sikh Educational Conference. 21. The next document relied upon on behalf of the petitioners is Annexure-3, which is a draft note on the proposal to associate the Prabandhak Committee of the Takht with the patronage and administration of Shree Guru Govind Singh College, which reads as follows:- "The College will gain in its initial stages and also later on by having an established organisation like the Prabandhak Committee of Shri Takht Harimanderji Saheb, Patna City, as Patron. It is expected that in course of time the Prabandhak Committee may be brought under statutory body by Act of Parliament. It is, therefore, proposed that the Prabandhak Committee may be requested by the College Governing Body to approve the following arrangement:- 1. Governing Body members, except the ex-officio, shall be appointed with the concurrence of the Prabandhak Committee. 2. In all matters pertaining to the College, the advice of the Prabandhak Committee shall be binding with Governing Body, provided that such advice does not run counter to any rule of the University or the Educational Department. 3. The College Annual Budget shall be included in the Budget of the Prabandhak Committee, which shall take steps : (i) to meet the deficits on expenditure after taking into account all receipts from fees, donations and grants, and, (ii) to raise funds for capital expenditure on the building of the College. 4. The ownership of the College shall be deemed to vest in the Prabandhak Committee, if the above arrangement is approved and put into practice." In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the University, this document is described to be fictitious and self-serving one, intended to support the petitioners. But this document does not stand in isolation in this regard and is followed by a resolution dated the 22nd August, 1960, of the Governing Body of the College, being Resolution No. 11 (Annexure-4), which reads as follows:- "Considered the Secretarys proposal regarding the patronage of the College by the Prabandhak Committee, Sri Takht Harimanderji, Patna Saheb. Resolved to forward the following resolution of the Governing Body to the Prabandhak Committee for its favourable consideration:- The Governing Body, Sri Guru Govind Singh College, Patna City, appeals to the Prabandhak Committee, Sri Takht Harimanderji, Patna Saheb, to treat this College as one of its Departments and to kindly undertake responsibility for its proper maintenance. Resolved to forward the following resolution of the Governing Body to the Prabandhak Committee for its favourable consideration:- The Governing Body, Sri Guru Govind Singh College, Patna City, appeals to the Prabandhak Committee, Sri Takht Harimanderji, Patna Saheb, to treat this College as one of its Departments and to kindly undertake responsibility for its proper maintenance. In case the Prabandhak Committee agrees to accept this arrangement, the Governing Body will be glad to accept three Donor Members on it as recommended by the Prabandhak Committee." It may be mentioned that the said meeting of the Governing Body was presided over by the then District Judge of Patna, who was its President, and the resolution of the Governing Body itself makes mention of Secretarys proposal regarding Patronage of the Prabandhak Committee, and the Governing Body appealed to the Prabandhak Committee to treat this College as one of its Departments and to take responsibility for its maintenance. It is asserted by the petitioners in Paragraph 17 of the writ application that the Prabandhak Committee accepted the aforesaid proposal of Governing Body (Annexure-4) and the agreement in respect of the administration of the College and the administration of the College thereafter worked satisfactorily and the Governing Body of the College was always appointed by the Takht. The assertion made in Paragraph 17 of the writ application that the proposal was accepted by the Prabandhak Committee has not been denied. What has been denied is that a Governing Body was formed in accordance with the statutes of the University, in Paragraph 26 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 6, to which I will refer later. 22. The next document on the point is the letter dated the 2nd May, 1964 (Annexure-5) of the Secretary of the Prabandhak Committee and the ex-Secretary of the Governing Body of the College, to the Vice-Chancellor of the Magadh University, regarding formation of a fresh Governing Body of the College. It refers to the fact that from the 1st June, 1963, the College had been running without a full-fledged Governing Body, whose life expired on the 31st May, 1963, and the last Governing Body had taken solid steps for the purchase of land and for its permanent establishment, but, after the expiry of the life of the first Governing Body, the cause of the College was suffering. It was also stated in that letter that a prayer was made to expedite the framing of the Governing Body by approving the membership of donor members from the Constituency of Rs. 25,000 and the relevant portion of which reads as follows:- "Keeping in view the necessity and urgency of the matter, I approach your goodself with a request to expedite the matter for framing the Governing Body at least by approving the membership of S. Arjan Singh, S. Bakhshish Singh Dhillon, as donor members from the Constituency of Rs. 25,000. The Prabandhak Committee, Sri Takht Harimandarji Patna Sahib, Patna City, is supposed to be the parent body of the College and hence feel the necessity to approach you." Mr. Ghose has relied upon this letter to show that the Prabandhak Committee is supposed to be the parent body of this College, which also supports his contention that the College was established by the Prabandhak Committee of the Sikhs. These are all the earliest and relevant documents relied upon by Mr. Ghose in support of his contention. 23. Mr. Basudeva Prasad has submitted that as approval was sought for as per Annexure-5 for donor-membership from the Vice-Chancellor, it showed that the College was sought to be governed according to the Regulations of the University. Mr. Prasad has placed strong reliance on the undermentioned statements made in the application for affiliation of the college, dated the 22nd February, 1960 (Annexure-D) : "The College authority is prepared to manage the College according to the laws of the University." ............................ ............................ "The application for affiliation could not be submitted in time as the proposal for starting a College here at Patna City came a bit late and it is Dr. D. Ram, the then Vice-Chancellor, of Bihar University of Patna, who enthused the people of the locality to take up this matter in right earnest, when he visited Sri Takht Harimanderji Patna City on the 5th January, 1960, on the occasion of the birthday celebration of Sri Guru Govind Singhji Maharaj, with the result that the College started from the ensuing academic session. Hence, I earnestly appeal to the Vice-Chancellor to be kind enough to accept the petition keeping in view the dire and emergent necessity for a College at Patna City." (Underlining is mine). Hence, I earnestly appeal to the Vice-Chancellor to be kind enough to accept the petition keeping in view the dire and emergent necessity for a College at Patna City." (Underlining is mine). On the above basis, learned counsel has submitted that the College was established as a result of enthusiasm created in the locality by Dr. Dukhan Ram, to meet the emergent necessity of a College at Patna City, and, secondly, the College authorities undertook to manage the College according to the laws of the University. From the mere mention in the application for affiliation that the College authorities were prepared to manage the College according to the laws of the University, no waiver of the right to administer under Article 30 of the Constitution can be inferred, as held in the case of St. Xaviers College V/s. The State of Gujarat ( AIR 1974 SC 1389 ) (supra). The following observations from that decision may usefully be quoted:- "Affiliation to a University really consists of two parts. One part relates to syllabi, curricula, courses of instruction, the qualifications of teachers, library, laboratories, conditions regarding health and hygiene of students. This part relates to establishments of educational institutions. The second part consists of terms and conditions regarding management of institutions. It relates to administration of educational institutions." Mr. Prasad overlooks the fact that the aforesaid application also mentions about the meeting held on the 4th January, 1960, under the Presidentship of Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia and the creation of a Trust for establishing Sri. Guru Govind Singh College at Patna City, with Sardar Surjit Singh Majithia as the Chairman and Sardar Budh Singh and Sardar Arjan Singh as Members of the Trust and it was this Trust, which had undertaken to finance the College out of the funds at its disposal. The Managing Committee of the College formed for the purpose also showed all Sardars, except the Principal and the staff-representatives. There is a controversy whether Pandit Mulkraj Sharma was a Sardar or not. In this regard an affidavit has been filed by Sardar Mulkraj Sharma and it has been asserted that he also is a Sardar. It is thus apparent that extracts from Annexure-2 have also been incorporated in the application for affiliation, which is a follow up action of Annexure-1. 24. Mr. In this regard an affidavit has been filed by Sardar Mulkraj Sharma and it has been asserted that he also is a Sardar. It is thus apparent that extracts from Annexure-2 have also been incorporated in the application for affiliation, which is a follow up action of Annexure-1. 24. Mr. Basudeva Prasad has also submitted that before filing of the application for affiliation, on the 21st February, 1960, a meeting was held in Room No. 25 of the Takht, and a copy of the proceeding of that meeting has been filed as Annexure-E. Learned counsel has urged that Serial No. 1, Shree K. Jha, Sub-divisional Officer of Patna City, was in the Chair and he was not a Sikh, and so were serial No. 7, Sri Ram Naresh Singh, Serial No. 18, Sri Sukhdeo Narain and Serial No. 22, Sri Mulkraj Sharma, and an ad hoc committee was formed of 51 members, which included some non-Sikhs, namely, the Sub-divisional Officer, Patna City, two Councillors of Patna City, Shree R. N. Arora and Sri Shambhunath Rastogi. From Annexure-E also it is apparent that those present were mostly Sikhs. The Sub-divisional Officer of Patna City, Shree K. Jha, may be in his official capacity and so also there may be one or two philanthrophic people, interested in education. The resolution was to form Managing Committee of the College consisting of 11 members, all of whom appear to be Sikhs. Amongst the ex-officio members, even the Principal and one of the staff representative appears to be Sikhs. This eleven-man Governing Body also included Pandit Mulkraj Sharma, as a member, who has sworn an affidavit dated the 4th September, 1974, in which he has denied the allegation made by Sardar Balwant Singh (resdt. No. 6), the Professor-in-charge, that the deponent is not a Sikh. The sum of Rs. 50,000, which was received as donation, barring a sum of Rs. 250, given by Dr. Dukhan Ram, the then Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University, is alleged to be from the Sikhs. Mr. Prasad has also relied upon Annexure-G, a letter from the Registrar of the Bihar University, dated the 29th June, 1960, addressed to the Secretary, Ad Hoc Committee, Sri Guru Govind Singh College, to show that the Syndicate of the University approved that the following class of persons will be members of the Governing Body of the College : 1. Principal .................... 1. 2. Principal .................... 1. 2. Representatives of the teaching staff. ................. 2. 3. Government Official ................ 1. District Judge 4. Donor Members ................. 3. Sardars. 5. Legislator ............... 1. 6. Oldboy s Association .................. 1. Sardar. 7. University Representative ................... 1. 8. Guardians Representative .................. 1. Learned counsel submits that this shows that the constitution of the Governing Body and the administration of the College was in the hands of the University and the proposed Governing Body was not accepted by the University. 25 The aforesaid letter, no doubt, shows that the University approved of the constitution of the Governing Body consisting of the aforesaid types of members, and not those suggested by the sponsors of the College, as per Annexure-D, but that letter does not answer the main question. On a reference to the aforesaid documents, there cannot be any manner of doubt that the College in question was established in pursuance of the resolution adopted at the 42nd All India Sikh Educational Conference held at the Gurudwara, in which the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee of Takht Sri Harimanderji was requested to take up the question of establishing and running a College (Annexure-1). On the 4th January, 1960, a meeting was held at the Takht, in which it was decided to establish Shree Guru Govind Singh College and a Board of Trustees was constituted, consisting of only Sikhs. It is true that some important functionaries, like the Vice-Chancellor of the Bihar University, and some other non-Sikhs were invited and a sum of Rs. 50,000 was collected as donation at the same meeting. It is also true that the Vice-Chancellor, who was a non-Sikh made a contribution of Rs. 250. But that will not change the complexion of the College, which was sponsored and established by the Gurudwara in pursuance of the (resolution adopted at the) 42nd All-India Sikh Educational Conference. The appointment of three Trustees, all being Sikhs, also leads to the same inference, although in other committees some officials such as the Sub-divisional Officer, Patna City, two ex-Mayors of the Patna Municipal Corporation, etc., were also associated. Annexure-4 also clearly indicates that the Governing Body requested the Prabandhak Committee to treat the College as one of its Departments, which was accepted by the Prabandhak Committee. Annexure-4 also clearly indicates that the Governing Body requested the Prabandhak Committee to treat the College as one of its Departments, which was accepted by the Prabandhak Committee. The petitioners, in reply to the counter-affidavit, have filed a letter dated the 2nd April, 1962 (Annexure-19) from the office of the Principal of the College to the General Secretary, Prabandhak Committee Sri Takht Harimanderji, in which the Prabandhak Committee has been described as the parent body of the College and in which it is stated that the College was housed in a small wing, and a request has been made for completion of another storey so that it may afford much needed relief to the College. Another appeal purported to have been issued by respondent No. 6 and others has been filed as Annexure-20, in which it is stated that the College is serving as a centre for Sikh culture, learning and scholarship, so that knowledge of the Gurus ideals can be brought to the common man in this part of India, and, an appeal for donations has also been made. 26. A reference to the aforesaid documents leaves no room for doubt that the College in question was a minority institution, established by the Sikh minority community within the meaning of Article 30 of the Constitution of India and entitled to be administered by them and there is no substance in the submission of Mr. B. Prasad that the College in question was not established by the Sikh community, but by the people of Patna City at large. 27. Mr. Basudeva Prasad has lastly submitted that this application should be dismissed for the reason that Annexure-17 dated the 10th July, 1974, appointing an ad hoc committee of four persons, was superseded by another Notification dated the 7th August, 1974 (Annexure-Z), in conformity with Bihar Ordinance No. 167 of 1974, dated the 1st August, 1974, filed by the Vice-Chancellor (respondent No. 2). According to Annexure-Z, a three-man Governing Body consisting of the District Judge of Patna, the Sub-divisional Officer of Patna City and the Principal/Professor-in-Charge of the College, was constituted. Even these two Annexures are not in conformity with Annexure-4. 28. There is some controversy, as to whether the ad hoc committee constituted as a result of the Ordinance did function or did not function, or the one constituted under Annexure-Z did function or not. Even these two Annexures are not in conformity with Annexure-4. 28. There is some controversy, as to whether the ad hoc committee constituted as a result of the Ordinance did function or did not function, or the one constituted under Annexure-Z did function or not. At the time of the admission of this application on the 14th August, 1974, an ad interim injunction was issued against the Magadh University and the operation of Annexure-17 was stayed. This order was made absolute on the 6th September, 1974. The writ application, therefore, cannot be dismissed on the ground of issue of any subsequent notification and the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the issuance of Annexure-17 or Annexure-Z contravened the right of the petitioners to administer the College, guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. 29. Mr. Prasad has then submitted that an earlier writ application, being Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 715 of 1973, seeking the same relief was dismissed by the High Court and a title suit, being Title Suit No. 120 of 1973, with regard to the same subject-matter is pending in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Patna, and, therefore, this writ application should be dismissed. There is no substance in this submission of Mr. Prasad as well. Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 715 of 1973 was filed by Shree Mulkraj Sharma and Shree Ramji Mishra Manohar against the appointment of an ad hoc committee by Notification dated the 14th June, 1973, (a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-9 by the petitioners), which was permitted to be withdrawn. Thereafter, Title Suit No. 120 of 1973 was filed by Shri B. S. Dhillon, for a declaration of the said Annexure as invalid and restraining the members of the Ad Hoc Committee from functioning and issuance of an injunction also against the University. It is thus apparent that the earlier writ application and the suit were by different persons and that cannot be a ground for dismissing this writ application. 30. On the 1st July, 1975, on a petition filed by respondent No. 6, this Court ordered that respondent No. 6, who was under orders of suspension will not be removed from the post that he might be holding during the pendency of this writ application. 30. On the 1st July, 1975, on a petition filed by respondent No. 6, this Court ordered that respondent No. 6, who was under orders of suspension will not be removed from the post that he might be holding during the pendency of this writ application. Respondent No. 6, on the 24th September, 1975, filed another petition, which was directed to be considered at the time of the hearing of this application (vide Order No. 10 dated the 25th September, 1975). In that petition, respondent No. 6 has made a grievance that he has not been paid his salary or subsistence allowance for the last 18 months. Mr. B. C. Ghose, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners, gave an undertaking on the 10th November, 1975, that all arrears due to the said respondent No. 6 would be paid within a fortnight. A petition has been filed on behalf of the said respondent after the close of the hearing of this case that commitment has not yet been fulfilled and the respondent has not been paid a single paisa. A supplementary affidavit has also been filed by respondent No. 6, stating that the petitioners are raising false plea so as not to pay the respondent anything. It is not necessary to go into the details of these controversies. However, I consider it just and proper to direct that the petitioners must pay all arrears and dues in accordance with law to respondent No. 6 within a month of this judgment as undertaken by the learned counsel on their behalf. I also consider it just and proper to direct that in case of any difference between the petitioners and respondent No. 6 as to the amount due, the amount admitted by the petitioners must be paid forthwith and the matter regarding the amount that is disputed may be referred to the Vice-Chancellor for his decision, which will be binding on the parties. 31. I would accordingly hold that the College in question is a denominational institution, established by the Sikh community and the petitioners are entitled to the protections under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are forbidden to take such action as may amount to interference with the exercise of that right. The constitution of the ad hoc committee, as per Annexure-17 having lapsed, no specific order quashing the same is necessary. The respondents are forbidden to take such action as may amount to interference with the exercise of that right. The constitution of the ad hoc committee, as per Annexure-17 having lapsed, no specific order quashing the same is necessary. To avoid any controversy I consider it expedient to quash Annexure-Z, the notification dated the 7th August, 1974, a copy of which has been filed by respondent No. 2, by which Annexure-17 is said to have been superseded by the University. The petitioners are directed to pay all arrears and dues legally payable to respondent No. 6 within a month from today. 32. In the result, the writ application is allowed. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. UDAY SINHA, J. 33 I agree.