Judgment Alok Singh, J. All these writ petitions are inter-connected involving identical questions of facts and law, therefore, all these writ petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Undisputedly, entire constructed property situated in Khasra No. 90, Mauja Kharkhari, Tehsil and District Haridwar was of Gangadhar Mahadev Trust, a religious and charitable institution. After the death of the sole trustee/Manager of the religious institution, learned Collector vide order dated 21.02.2005 was pleased to declare the property, in question, as escheat property under Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act. 3. As per the assessment record of the Municipality, all the petitioners and their predecessors were shown as tenants of different portions of the trust property. Order dated 21.02.2005, passed by the Collector, Haridwar declaring the property, in question, as escheat property was challenged in O.S. No. 21 of 2005, Madhusudan Bhardwaj Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another and O.S. No. 21 of 2005 is still pending disposal before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Haridwar. After passing of the order dated 21.02.2005, notices were issued to the petitioners under Section 4 of the U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972. Thereafter, impugned orders were passed directing the eviction of the petitioners from the various portions of the property earlier belonging to the Trust. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this Court by way of present writ petition. 4. I have heard Mr. M.C. Pant, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.C. Arya, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 5. In my considered opinion, property belonging to the religious and charitable institution or trust is always called as endowment and such property cannot be treated as individual property of any Trustees or Manager or individual. In my further considered opinion, after the death of the Trustee, new Trustee can be inducted as per the scheme of the Trust or Competent Court can be approached under Section 92 of the C.P.C. for appropriate direction for the management of such trust property. Since property belonging to religious or charitable institution cannot be treated as personal property, therefore, provision of Hindu Succession Act cannot be pressed in service to declare such property as escheat property by invoking Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act. 6. Since property belonging to religious or charitable institution cannot be treated as personal property, therefore, provision of Hindu Succession Act cannot be pressed in service to declare such property as escheat property by invoking Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act. 6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, since petitioners and their predecessors were inducted as tenants by the then Trustee of the Trust, the petitioners cannot be said to be unauthorized occupant after the order dated 21.01.2005 whereby property was declared escheat property by invoking Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act. Not only this, Civil Suit is still pending disposal involving the question as to whether property could be declared as escheat property. 7. Consequently, all the writ petitions succeed and are hereby allowed. Impugned orders are hereby set aside. 8. No order as to cost.