Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 745 (HP)

Ajay Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2012-10-19

DEEPAK GUPTA, RAJIV SHARMA

body2012
Judgment Rajiv Sharma, Judge: 1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that the practice of distributing the offerings to the temple of Mata Brajeshwari Devi, Tehsil and District Kangra, H.P. in the ratio of 50:50 amongst the pujaries and Government be stopped. 3. The petitioner has challenged Clause-6(a) of Annexure P-1, dated 03.05.2012. The mother of the petitioner has already filed a Civil Suit bearing No. 6-K of 2009 before the District Judge, Kangra for the redressal of her grievance. This fact has not been disclosed by the petitioner in the petition. 4. The averments made by the petitioner(s) that the temple has been taken over on 04.11.1986 is not legally correct. 5. The respondents have filed their replies. Initially as per resolution of the temple trust adopted on 10.02.1988, it was resolved to share income of the temple between the temple trust and the hereditary priests @ 50:50. Subsequently, it was resolved by the temple trust that 20% of the income received by way of offerings in the charity boxes be apportioned towards committed liabilities and rest of the income received was to be shared between the temple trust and the hereditary pujaries equally. The existing practice of sharing of income received during Shaiya Pooja was allowed to be continued as usual, i.e., @ 50:50. The resolution of the temple trust, dated 10.02.1988 was adopted under the chairmanship of the Chairman of the temple trust-Cum-Sub Divisional Officer, Kangra. In sequel to the directions issued by this Court in CWP No. 603/2003, 257/2004 and CWP No. 787/2004, the pattern of distribution of income of hereditary pujaries (baridars) was rationalized and regulated vide office order Nos. 514 and 523, dated 31.03.2012 read in conjunction with office order, dated 03.05.2012. Initially, the hereditaries priests used to get 40% income received in cash. However, now as per these decisions, the share of the hereditary priests has come down to 30% in place of 40%. However, the existing arrangement of sharing of income received during Shaiya Pooja, i.e., 50:50 has remained intact. Initially, the hereditaries priests used to get 40% income received in cash. However, now as per these decisions, the share of the hereditary priests has come down to 30% in place of 40%. However, the existing arrangement of sharing of income received during Shaiya Pooja, i.e., 50:50 has remained intact. It has been clearly mentioned in the reply filed by respondents No. 1 to 3 that hereditary priests have no claim over the income received by way of issuance of receipts, through money orders, demand drafts and other valuables (gold and silver) as per orders, dated 31.03.2012, 03.05.2012, which have come into force w.e.f. 01.04.2012. 6. Mr. K.D. Sood, learned Senior Advocate, for respondents No. 1 to 3 in both the petitions has submitted that no money is remitted to Government exchequer and income received by the temple trust is utilized for providing better facilities to pilgrims by the temple administration as per the provisions under the Himachal Pradesh Hindu Public Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1984. The respondents No. 1 to 4 have denied that clandestinely additional container/boxes/danpatras are installed with a view to conceal the income from the Government or from accountant. 7. According to office order, dated 31st March, 2012, there is inclusion of income from all subsidiary Danpatras (Golaks) in addition to the main danpatras. The perishable items, i.e., fruit, sweets and other type of parshad offered to the deity have been permitted to distributed to the pilgrims by the pujaries of the temple trust on duty and the baridar. Small chunnies, suhagies and green coconuts are to be handed over to the baridars as per existing practice. Dry coconut and big chunnies received in temple are to be distributed in between the temple trust and the hereditary pujaries (baridars) in the ratio of 80:20. The suits, ornaments, valuables and other articles offered by the pilgrims to the deity shall be the property of the temple trust. 8. What is visualized in Clause-6(a), is that the income received through Danpatras (Golaks) placed in the temple premises, will be shared between the temple trust and the baridars equally after apportionment of the funds towards committed liabilities as per the formula/principle laid down in paragraph No. 7. The only exclusion made in Sub-section (a) of Clause-6 is that income derived from Danpatras placed in the Langar Bhawan and near the Annapurna Mata will not be apportioned. 9. The only exclusion made in Sub-section (a) of Clause-6 is that income derived from Danpatras placed in the Langar Bhawan and near the Annapurna Mata will not be apportioned. 9. We are of the considered view that the ratio of 70:30 maintained for the distributaries of the income is reasonable and needs no interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, in view of the observations and the analysis made hereinabove, there is no merit in these writ petitions and the same are dismissed. However, it is made clear that the observations made hereinabove will have no nearing on the Civil Suit pending before the learned District Judge, Kangra. The interim orders are vacated. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.