Judgement ORDER:- This revision petition has arisen against the order under Memo No. DJK / PMD/ 5 / 94-95 / 257-290 dtd. 18-295 passed by the learned District Judge, Kamrup / Administrator of Hajo Powa Macca Dargarh Sarif, Guwahati superseding the other orders issued in the matter of the petitioner Dargarh Sharif. 2. Revision petitioner is the Managing Committee of Powa Macca Dargarh Sharif, Hajo represented by its Khadim, Syed Duil Mahammad Ali an elected body by the respective voters of the village Dhuhibala, Fakirtala and 5th Mile. This committee was elected for 5 years with effect from 25-5-1988. 3. The case of the petitioner is that after being elected, the Managing Committee used to function as usual and undertook various developmental works for the Dargarh Sharif and have given an upliftment of the entire image of the Dargarh Sharif to the satisfaction of all and earned accolades of the people concerned. That though the term of the Managing Committee was due to expire on 25-5-1993 due to non-completion of some important developmental work of the Dargarh Sharif, the then learned District Judge, Kamrup/Administrator extended the term of the Managing Committee till the election of a new Managing Committee by order dated 18-6-1993. The Managing Committee has taken all round development work during this extended period and also has undertaken steps pertaining to the voters list for election of new Managing Committee. Petitioner-Managing Committee also conducted the Urus in the Dargah from 14-1-1995 to 15-2-1995 very successfully under the guidance and able management of the Khadim. That, on 18-2-1995 learned District Judge, Kamrup passed the impugned order ex pate, behind the back of the petitioner, withdrawing the extension order passed by the then District Judge, Kamrup and constituted an ad hoc committee to run the Dargah. Further contention of the petitioner is that by the same order the learned District Judge has given the power to operate Bank Account and also ordered to consider the amendment of the "Scheme" and virtually by the order he has drafted out a separate scheme to replace the existing one which has been operative since 1921. 4. Before proceeding to examine the action of the District Judge a brief note of the "Scheme" claimed to have been operative since 1921 is necessary as it has long historic back ground behind it. 4. Before proceeding to examine the action of the District Judge a brief note of the "Scheme" claimed to have been operative since 1921 is necessary as it has long historic back ground behind it. A suit being Title Suit No. 3 /1919 was instituted in the court of the Assam Valley District, Kamrup under Section 92 of C. P. C. which was decreed on 22-2-21 by Mr RE Jack, Esq. the then District Judge, LAD by which a scheme was made out for proper functioning of the Dargah. Against the decree an appeal being No. 170 / 21 was preferred before the Calcutta High Court and the same was dismissed by a Division Bench and the decree of the trial court was affirmed. It is contended on behalf of petitioner that in terms of above mentioned decree, the Administration of Powa Macca Dargah has been continuing till now as trust property. Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner has insisted that the scheme can be modified only in accordance with the terms of the said decree. The scheme provides that any five members of the Managing Committee shall be entitled to approach the District Judge at any time with a view to modify the scheme and the same may be modified by the Judge -either on such representation, or at any time, after due enquiry as laid down in the said decree (Annexure 4 to the petition). On perusal of the decree it is apparent that the scheme can be amended by the members elected by the General Body and not otherwise. Further as submitted by the learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner that as per practice prevalent, a general notice for amendment of the scheme is to be issued inviting memorandum from all the Muslims of Assam asking suggestions to the amendments and decision is to be taken after hearing the concerned parties along with the elected body. 5. Further as submitted by the learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner that as per practice prevalent, a general notice for amendment of the scheme is to be issued inviting memorandum from all the Muslims of Assam asking suggestions to the amendments and decision is to be taken after hearing the concerned parties along with the elected body. 5. On the back drop of the facts the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the learned District Judge / Administrator on the ground that the learned District Judge /Administrator has no jurisdiction to pass the order in contrary to the prevalent scheme of management of the Dargah as accepted by the Court in TS 3 / 1919; that the impugned order is illegal with material irregularities as the Same was passed without affording opportunity to the petitioner and without making known to them the allegations purportedly levelled by some interested persons. Apparently this order was passed by the District Judge on the basis of some representations by persons of repute of the community interested in the proper functioning and management of the Dargah and complaints by villagers of the adjoining villages of the Dargah who made allegation against the improper management of the Committee under the present Khadim to the detriment of the interest of the Dargah. Insistence of the complainants was for immediate election of the Managing Committee in place of the existing one whose terms has already been expired. 6. Insistence of the complainants was for immediate election of the Managing Committee in place of the existing one whose terms has already been expired. 6. Petitioner has claimed for quashing of the impugned order submitting that:- (a) The scheme does not provide provision for ad hoc committee; (b) The order was ex parte, without giving opportunity to represent the case and counter the allegation of the interested complainants, though the petitioner being the elected body was functioning on the strength of the courts order; (c) A proceeding to amend the scheme cannot be undertaken / initiated as done by the ex parte impugned order dated 18-2-1995; (d) The District Judge cannot appoint ad hoc treasurer to operate the Bank Account which is being done by the Administrator/ District Judge since 1976 regularly; That the treasurer of the ad hoc Committee once removed by the then District Judge for his misconduct; therefore the same man cannot he entrusted with the responsibility of the Dargah; (e) Further, the District Judge by his officer has collected money from the sealed boxes of the Dargah premises since 1976, as the Administrator is the overall superviser as per the Scheme. He deposits the amount so collected in the Bank Account operated by him. The District Judge used to issue cheques to Khadim under the sanction of the Dargah Committee for management of the Dargah since 1976. That this became a settled procedure followed by the then District Judge by his order as an administrator. The collection boxes are kept under the seal of the District Judge, but by the impugned order the District Judge refused to follow that procedure and wanted to transfer that function to the ad hoc treasurer. 7. Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though this court stayed the impugned order, the District Judge refused to collect the money and deposit in the Bank Account as was done earlier which caused damage to the collected money inside the boxes which are kept in the open premises exposing to rain. It is further submitted that though the Khadim has approached the learned District Judge and filed petition for collection of the money from those boxes and deposit in the Bank Account no step has been taken by the District Judge which caused damage to the financial interest of the Dargah. It is further submitted that though the Khadim has approached the learned District Judge and filed petition for collection of the money from those boxes and deposit in the Bank Account no step has been taken by the District Judge which caused damage to the financial interest of the Dargah. Accordingly a direction has been prayed for to collect the money from the sealed boxes through his officer and deposit to the Bank Account operated by him as was done earlier. 8. The respondent No. 5, Secretary to the ad hoc Committee has filed affidavit in opposition for himself. Respondent No. 10 Md Shahnur Ali has filed another affidavit on behalf of himself and other respondents, namely, respondents 9, 11, 12,14, 16 and 17 who have supported the case of the petitioner praying for allowing the revision petition by setting aside the impugned order constituting the ad hoc committee and to hold the election of the Dargah Sharif within May, 1995. The respondent No. 5 in his affidavit has averred that as the Managing Committee whose term has already been expired on 24-5-1993 did not take any step for holding the election for the next term, that draft voters list has not been prepared and denied the claim of the petitioner that overall development has been made by the petitioner committee, but admitted that the term of the petitioner Managing Committee was extended by District Judge by order dated 18-6-1993 and no fixed time for extension was ordered. That though the learned District Judge extended time to prepare voters list no steps had been taken by the petitioner Managing Committee and on 20-9-1993 the Khadim submitted voters list of two constituencies, namely, Dhuhibala and Muslimpatty and again sought time to submit complete draft voters list till January, 1994. However, this period also expired without any process in preparation of complete voters list. On 17-8-1994 another reminder was issued to submit the draft voters list by Oct. 1994 and that as no action was in progress, the impugned order had been passed on the request of representatives of the locality. It is further averred that in order to implement the scheme and for greater interest of the Shrine as well as for the interest of the people who are entitled under the scheme to participate in the election of the Managing Committee the impugned order has to be passed. 9. Mr. It is further averred that in order to implement the scheme and for greater interest of the Shrine as well as for the interest of the people who are entitled under the scheme to participate in the election of the Managing Committee the impugned order has to be passed. 9. Mr. B. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 submitted that the District Judge has the jurisdiction to pass the impugned order which was passed to protect the interest of the Dargah Sharif; that the scheme can be modified by the learned District Judge as provisions under the scheme provide that any five members of the Managing Committee shall be entitled to approach the District Judge at any time for modification of the scheme on such representation. That clause 19 of the Scheme empowers the District Judge to modify the scheme suo motu which has been done within his jurisdiction, more so, when some provisions of the scheme are found old, outdated and inconsistent with the changing time. 10. From the impugned order, it transpires that the learned District Judge has drafted out a new scheme proposed to be replaced by the scheme planned out by the decree in TS 3/19. As discussed above the scheme contemplated any modification to be made by five members of the Managing Committee who would be entitled to approach District Judge at any time to modify the scheme and the District Judge can do so on such representation or at any time after due enquiry as laid down in the said decree, Apparently the decree provides that the scheme can be amended by the members of the elected General Body and not otherwise. Further as prevalent practice shows, a general notice for amendment of the scheme is to be issued inviting memorandum from all the Muslim of Assam asking suggestions. The learned District Judge proceeded to amend the scheme ignoring the mandate of the decree unauthorisedly which is beyond his jurisdiction. Further the constitution of the ad hoc committee was also materially illegal as the complainant parties also approached him for an early election in accordance with the provisions of law. The learned District Judge proceeded to amend the scheme ignoring the mandate of the decree unauthorisedly which is beyond his jurisdiction. Further the constitution of the ad hoc committee was also materially illegal as the complainant parties also approached him for an early election in accordance with the provisions of law. Assumption of authority to modify the scheme and constitution of ad hoc committee, which was not contemplated in the scheme, without giving a hearing to the existing committee also violates all norms of fair play and judicial practice and this failure to follow the rightful procedure prejudiced the interest of the elected body. Further the learned District Judge acted with material irregularity by referring the financial power, such as collection of money from the donation boxes and depositing the same in the Bank Account by the treasurer of the ad hoc committee contrary to the practice and procedure, followed under the scheme which has been fully in implementation since 1976. Further it was complained that the money in the sealed boxes was not collected by the District Judge since 18-2-1995 and this action of the District Judge is detrimental to the interest of the Dargah as main income of the Dargah is from the collection of the donation boxes placed for the purpose in the Dargah premises. 11. Mr. B. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that for protection of the Dargah early election is necessary to which Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner also has no different view. Accordingly I hold that early election of the Managing Committee of the Dargah Sharif would be a proper step to protect the interest of the Dargah. Mr. Choudhury has submitted that the Khadim has already submitted draft voters list of all the seven constituencies and process for election can be initiated immediately. In that view of the matter I direct as follows: (a) The District Judge shall hold election for election of a new Managing Committee in accordance with the existing scheme within 45 days from receipt of this order. (b) The existing elected Managing Committee with Khadim Syed Dilmahammad shall continue to function / manage the affairs of the Dargah till the new elected Managing Committee is constituted. (b) The existing elected Managing Committee with Khadim Syed Dilmahammad shall continue to function / manage the affairs of the Dargah till the new elected Managing Committee is constituted. (c) The District Judge is further directed to collect the money from the sealed donation boxes of the Dargah and deposit the amount in the Dargah Bank Account operated by him and keep the boxes under seal of the court. (d) The District Judge shall count and record the damages money / notes found in the collection boxes, in order to assess the extent of damages for future action. The counting be made in presence of the District Judge or officer appointed by him for this purpose and the Khadim along with four / five members of the Managing Committee. 12. In view of the reasons discussed above the impugned order dated 18-2-1995 and the subsequent order dated 21-1-l995 are set aside. The revision petition is allowed. No costs. Revision allowed.