ORDER : 1. Though the matter was listed in the fresh category however, on the joint request of the counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard today itself. 2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers: “It is, therefore, most respectfully and humble prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction this Hon'ble Court may kindly accept the writ petition filed by the petitioner and quashed and set aside the judgment dated 31.01.2024 (Annx-22) passed by the Assistant Commissioner Devsthan Department Ajmer Division Ajmer and further set aside the entire proceedings initiated subsequent to passing of the aforesaid impugned judgment. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.” 3. The petitioner is a member of the Akhil Bharatvarsh Shree Maharshi Gautam Education and Charitable Trust (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as ‘Trust’) established in 2009 and registered in 2010 at Jodhpur. The petitioner was elected as the President of the Trust in 2015 and his tenure was up till 10.10.2020. As per the Constitution of the Trust (Annexure-1) of the Trust, the tenure of the petitioner’s election was for a period of 5 years and Section 10 of the Constitution of the Trust provides for constitution of the Managing Committee and the President under Section 10 (3) (4) of the Constitution of the Trust is empowered for appointment of the Election Officer for conducting of the elections. 4. Furthermore, the petitioner sought permission from the Police Commissioner, Jodhpur vide a communication dated 07.07.2020 (Annexure-2) for conducting of the elections and to call a meeting of the Managing Committee during the COVID-19 pandemic which was denied by the Deputy Commissioner (East) due to widespread of COVID-19 vide order dated 20.07.2020 (Annexure-3). 5. 4. Furthermore, the petitioner sought permission from the Police Commissioner, Jodhpur vide a communication dated 07.07.2020 (Annexure-2) for conducting of the elections and to call a meeting of the Managing Committee during the COVID-19 pandemic which was denied by the Deputy Commissioner (East) due to widespread of COVID-19 vide order dated 20.07.2020 (Annexure-3). 5. Thereafter the petitioner wrote a letter dated 21.07.2020 (Annexure-4) to the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department, Jodhpur seeking directions that the tenure of the Managing Committee and the President will come to an end soon and due to the COVID-19 pandemic the election process cannot be conducted and, therefore, the existing Managing Committee as well as the President shall be permitted to carry on the tenure for one more year. 6. Thereafter, vide communication dated 26.07.2020 (Annexure-5) the petitioner wrote to the Managing Committee as well as to all the office bearers of the Trust proposing for appointment of Election Officer under Section 10 (3)(4) of the Constitution of the Trust and the name of Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma was proposed for appointment as an Election Officer. Furthermore the petitioner vide communication dated 14.09.2020 (Annexure- 6) also sought permission from Deputy Commissioner (East) Police to conduct the meeting of Trust on 29.10.2020 which was rejected vide order dated 25.09.2020 (Annexure- 7) on the ground of pandemic COVID-19. 7. Thereafter vide communication dated 05.10.2020 (Annexure-8) the petitioner appointed the proposed Election Officer Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma as the Election Officer for conducting the election of the Trust in the compliance of Section 10 (3) (4) of the Constitution of the Trust and the Election Officer vide acceptance letter (Annexure-9) gave his confirmation and acceptance to conduct the elections of the Trust. 8. The petitioner vide communication dated 08.10.2020 (Annexure-10) informed the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department, Jodhpur regarding the appointment of the Election Officer for conducting the elections of the Trust. Furthermore the Election Officer issued the election Notification on 03.11.2020 (Annexure-11), wherein the date for publication of the voters’ list was decided as 12.11.2020 and the date for obtaining nomination paper date was decided as 26.11.2020, and the elections were scheduled to be held on 25.01.2021. 9. Furthermore, objections were raised by respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyay who was a candidate for the post of President of the Trust and who sought the appointment of receiver for the election process. 9. Furthermore, objections were raised by respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyay who was a candidate for the post of President of the Trust and who sought the appointment of receiver for the election process. Upon the aforesaid objections of respondent No.4, the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department, Jodhpur Division vide letter dated (Annexure-12) appointed Shri Deepak Dave, Inspector as the observer of the entire election and further directed that the entire election process be conducted under his observation and he was also directed to declare the result of the election after completion of the process. 10. Thereafter the election was conducted on 25.01.2021, as decided, and for the post of President as many as 5 candidates contested and a total of 1749 votes were casted, wherein the petitioner was declared the winner by a majority of 1025 votes and the private respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyah received 734 votes. The private respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyah contested the election who was declared as unelected and the petitioner was declared elected to the post of President and thereafter, a certificate (Annexure-14) was issued by the Election Officer in favour of the petitioner. 11. Furthermore Deepak Dave who was appointed as an observer for the elections, submitted his report dated 27.01.2021 (Annexure-15) to the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department upon successful completion of the elections on 27.01.2021 and stated therein that the entire election was conducted in compliance with the Constitution of the Trust of the Trust and that no objections were received and the election certificate was issued and the election process was concluded. 12. Thereafter the petitioner after being elected as a President of the Trust submitted the form No. 8 (Annexure-16) to the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Jodhpur for recording the changes under section 23 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1959’) in the register of the Trust on account of the fresh elections. Thereafter a public notice dated 08.02.2021 (Annexure-17) was issued by the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department, Jodhpur in compliance of the Section 23 of the Act of 1959 inviting objections regarding the proposed change in the entry, if any, and thereafter the private respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyah submitted objections (Annexure-18) challenging the proposed change in the entry on the ground that the election process was not followed as well as the entire election process was conducted illegally by the petitioner and the Election Officer was appointed illegally. He further objected that the process of publication of the voters’ list as well as the process of receiving the nomination paper was also illegal and thus the entire election process was vitiated. Thereafter, he prayed that the election may be set aside and the name of the petitioner not be recorded in the register. Furthermore, the petitioner submitted the reply (Annexure-19) to the objections filed by the respondent No.4. 13. Furthermore on the directions of the Commissioner Devasthan Department, Udaipur, the matter was transferred to Devasthan Department Ajmer Devision, Ajmer wherein vide interim order dated 08.10.2021 (Annexure-20) the request of the private respondents was denied for seizing the bank accounts of the Trust and restraining the petitioner from exercising control over the account. Furthermore another objection (Annexure-21) was raised by private respondent No.5 Arun Joshi through power of attorney holder Shri Kailash Joshi raising allegations in the same lines as private respondent No.4 Hari Gopal Upadhyay regarding irregularities in the election process. 14. The objections raised by the private respondents were accepted and the election was set aside and directions were given for conducting fresh elections by the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department vide order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) on the ground that the elections were conducted without the permission of the Managing Committee and that the appointment of the Election Officer by the petitioner was without power and authority. The petitioner being aggrieved of the order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) has preferred this writ petition. 15. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) passed by the respondent No.3, Assistant commissioner Devasthan Department is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and dehors the provisions of the Act of 1959. The petitioner being aggrieved of the order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) has preferred this writ petition. 15. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) passed by the respondent No.3, Assistant commissioner Devasthan Department is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and dehors the provisions of the Act of 1959. He further submitted that the respondent No.3 has wrongly set aside the election on the ground that the election process was invalid, and that the petitioner did not seek permission from the Managing Committee however, the Section 23 of the Act of 1959 does not grant any power to the respondent No.3 to examine the validity of the election and set it aside as the same can only be done by way of filing a civil suit filed before the competent court having jurisdiction. He also submitted that Section 23 permits inquiry with regard to the change and not examining the validity or the nature of the said change and therefore, the Respondent No 3 has transgressed the powers as enumerated under section 23 of the Act of 1959 while passing the impugned order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22). 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the entire election process was conducted in presence of the observer appointed by the Devasthan Department itself, who prepared a detailed report of the election process, therefore, the elections cannot be set aside. He further submitted that the private respondent No 4 has himself participated in the election process as a candidate for President and he never raised any such objection during the election process and thus at this stage the private respondents cannot raise such objections and thus, the impugned order has been passed without considering the material facts of the case. It is further submitted that since the respondent No.4 himself participated in the election process, thus the respondent No.4 has no locus standi to even question the entire election process. 17. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no delay on the part of the petitioner in holding of the elections, inasmuch as the petitioner initially sought permission from Police Commissioner, Jodhpur vide communication dated 07.07.2020 (Annexure-2) for conducting of the elections and to call a meeting of the Managing Committee during the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the same was denied by the Deputy Commissioner (East) due to widespread of COVID-19 vide order dated 20.07.2020 (Annexure-3). It is further submitted that the petitioner, on 21.07.2020 wrote a letter to the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Jodhpur seeking extension of his tenure and that of Managing Committee, as the same was coming to end, however, due to COVID-19 pandemic, the election process could not be commenced. Learned counsel for the petitioner also sought permission from the Deputy Commissioner (East), Police to conduct the meeting of the Trust on 29.10.2020, however, the same was also denied vide order dated 25.09.2020 (Annex.7) while taking shelter of COVID-19. 18. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submitted that no illegality has been committed in appointment of the Election Officer by the petitioner, inasmuch as the President is empowered to appoint Election Officer in view of provision of Section 10 (3) (4) of the Constitution of the Trust. He further submitted that the finding of the respondent No 3 that the petitioner did not seek permission from the Managing Committee is baseless. He also submitted that the private respondents must have preferred an appropriate remedy before civil court challenging the election process and the result rather than filing objections before the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department. 19. In support of his submissions Learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgments passed by the hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors versus Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and Anr (Civil Appeal No. 5707 of 2023) and Balakrishna Ram versus UOI and Anr (Civil Appeal No.131/2020). 20. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under section 20 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act 1959 to file an appeal before the Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Udaipur thus, the elections being illegal have been rightly set aside vide the order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Ajmer after considering all the material available on record. 21. Learned counsel for the respondents also submitted that the petitioner has not come with clean hands and has concealed material facts from this Court, inasmuch as after passing the order dated 31.01.2024 fresh election process had already initiated on 15.02.2024 and the same was also notified, which is evident from the photocopy of the appointment letter of Election Officer, publication in the newspaper and the Notification issued for Election (Annexure(s)-R/4-5/1) and the petitioner had filed the writ petition on 19.02.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that these documents have not been placed on record by the petitioner. Moreover if fresh election process has already begun then no court can interfere in the election process after the same has been notified and initiated, thus the writ petition deserves to be dismissed on this ground itself. Counsel for the respondents further submitted that the petitioner has chosen not to counter the preliminary objections raised by the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that although the order dated 05.10.2020 (Annexure-8) issued by the petitioner appointing Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma as Election Officer was set aside by the Sanrakshan Mandal, despite the same the elections were held. 22. In support of his submissions Learned Counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of S.P Chengalvaraya Naidu By LRS vs Jagannath By Lrs and Ors reported in (1994) 1 SCC 1 ; Dalip Singh versus state of UP reported in 2010 AIR SCW 50; West Bengal Sate Election Commission and Ors v. Communist Party Of India and Ors. reported in AIR 2018 SCC 3964. Further the respondent also placed reliance on the judgments passed by this Hon’ble court in the case of Sudhir heeralal Dhadda versus Assistant Commissioner (SBCWP No. 1416/2018); Gopilal Tel versus State of Rajasthan and Ors (SBCWP No.3011/1990); Radheshaym versus State of Rajasthan and Ors (SBCWP No. 14606/2017); Prem Singh and Ors versus State of Rajasthan( SBCWP No.4337/2000. 23. Heard Learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record and the judgments cited at the Bar. 24. This Court finds that the Trust in question i.e. Akhil Bharatvarsh Shree Maharshi Gautam Education and Charitable Trust promulgated an amended constitution which came into effect by the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department Jodhpur vide order dated 18.09.2012. The impugned order has been passed while keeping into consideration Section 10 of the Constitution of Trust, whereby the Managing Committee was to be constituted and President was to be appointed. Furthermore, the election and the other activities were to be conducted by the Managing Committee. The bone of contention in the matter arose when the tenure of the present petitioner being the President came to an end on 10/11.10.2020 and while trying to conduct elections he was trying to manipulate the same by nominating one Sh. Furthermore, the election and the other activities were to be conducted by the Managing Committee. The bone of contention in the matter arose when the tenure of the present petitioner being the President came to an end on 10/11.10.2020 and while trying to conduct elections he was trying to manipulate the same by nominating one Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma, as an Election Officer. Upon perusal of the impugned order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, Ajmer, it is seen that the petitioner sought directions from the Sanrakshan Mandal vide communication dated 21.09.2020 in respect to the elections. However, without waiting for such directions, the petitioner appointed one Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma, as Election Officer vide order dated 05.10.2020. The Sanrakshan Mandal gave necessary directions to the petitioner on 09.10.2020 for conducting the elections in the interest of the Trust. Since the petitioner appointed Election Officer, namely, Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma, on his own, the Sanrakshan Mandal while invoking its powers under Section 10 (2) and 10 (3) (3) of the Constitution of the Trust, quashed the appointment of the Election Officer vide its order dated 12.10.2020. 25. Furthermore this court finds that a decisive turn came into dispute when Sanrakshan Mandal exercised its power under Section 10 (3) (3) and 10 (2) of the Constitution of the Trust which empowered the Sanrakshan Mandal to set aside and declare void the decision of the Managing Committee and the President as their decision was against the interest of the Trust and such decision by virtue of the Constitution of Trust is to be treated as final and accepted by all. Section 10 (2) and 10 (3) (3) of the Constitution of the Trust reads as under: ^^10- izcU/kdkfj.kh lfer (Sic! lfefr½ dk xBu %& 2- fo/kku dh la'kksf/kr /kkjk 10¼02½ esa of.kZr laj{kd VªLVhx.k dk ,d laj{kd e.My gksxkA ;fn dk;Zdkfj.kh }kjk VªLV ds mn~ns';ksa ,oa fgrksa ds foijhr dksbZ fu.kZ; fy;k tkrk gS rks laj{kd e.My dh cSBd esa cgqer ls mDr fu.kZ; dks fujlr djus dk vf/kdkj laj{kd e.My dks gksxk ,oa ,slk fu.kZ; loZekU; gksxkA 10¼3½¼3½ % izcU/kdkfj.kh lfefr dk euksu;u %& 3- izcU/kdkfj.kh lfefr ,oa v/;{k }kjk fy, x, voS/kkfud fu.kZ; dks laj{kd e.My ds cgqer }kjk vekU; fd;k tk ldrk gSA^^ 26. It is important to note that despite the order dated 05.10.2020 (Annexure-8), by which Sh. It is important to note that despite the order dated 05.10.2020 (Annexure-8), by which Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma was appointed as Election Officer, having been set aside by the Sanrakshan Mandal on 12.10.2020, the petitioner proceeded with election process and Notification dated 03.11.2020 (Annexure-11) was issued for holding of the election by Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Election Officer on 25.01.2021. 27. This Court further observes that contrary to the basic spirit of the Constitution of the Trust, as envisaged in Section 10 (2) and 10 (3) (3) of the Constitution of the Trust, the subsequent holding of electoral exercise on 25.01.2021 was illegal, inasmuch as it was against the wishes/authority of the Sanrakshan Mandal, particularly when Sanrakshan Mandal while invoking its power under Section 10 (2) and 10 (3) (3) of the Constitution of the Trust set aside the appointment of the Election Officer. Thus, in the opinion of this Court such elections have been rightly set aside by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department as it goes against the very ethos of the Constitution of the Trust and challenges the supremacy of Sanrakshan Mandal envisaged in Section 10(2) and 10(3)(3) of the Constitution of the Trust. This Court also observes that the Assistant Commissioner was right in giving fresh directions to the Sanrakshan Mandal to appoint an Electoral Officer and conduct a free and fair election exercise. 28. This court is also conscious of the fact that in pursuance of the order dated 31.01.2024 (Annexure-22) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, the election exercise has commenced afresh vide notification dated 15.02.2024 (Annexure-R/4-5/1). 29. Thus in the light of the above discussion, no interference is called for in the order dated 31.10.2024 (Annexure-22) passed by the Assistant Commissioner Devasthan department, Ajmer, and thus, the writ petition is dismissed. Stay application as well as all other pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed.