Disposed

Randhir Kumar, v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Jan 2020CWJC/1214/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order in a writ petition challenging a notification under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act. The petitioners sought quashing of the notification and a writ of certiorari, claiming the petitioner organization is an NGO, not a religious trust, and the action violated natural justice.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to move before the appropriate forum.

Randhir Kumar, Vs The State of Bihar — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1214 of 2020

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Randhir Kumar, aged about 31 years, Gender-Male, S/o Sri Yogendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Muraura, P.S. Biharsarif, District- Nalanda.

¶4

Suresh Kumar Sinha, aged about 72 years, Male, S/o Late SadaShiv Prasad, Resident of Mohalla- Amhar, District- Nalanda.

¶5

Saryug Narayan Verma, aged about 78 years, Male, S/o Late Komal Mahto, resident of Village- Mehnar, P.S. Deepnagar, District- Nalanda.

¶6

Krishna Prasad, aged about 60 years, Male, S/o Late HardeoSinha, Resident of Mohiuddinpur, P.S. Biharsharif, District- Nalanda.

¶7

Ranjeet Kumar, aged about 52 years, Male, S/o Late Nagendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Murarura, P.S. Biharsharif, District- Nalanda.

¶8

... ... Petitioner/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar through the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

¶11

The Inspector General, Registration Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

¶13

The District Officer-cum-district Magistrate, Chairman, religious Trust Committee, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

¶14

Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, District- Nalanda.

¶15

The Circle Officer, Biharsharif.

¶16

The Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna- 800001 through its Chairman.

¶17

The Chairman, The Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna- 800001.

¶18

Ramchandra Das @ ramchandra Yadav, s/o- Late Chotan Prasad, R/o Village- Bibrapar, P.O.- Moratalab, P.S.- Rahui, District- Nalanda.

¶19

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, AC to AG For the Board : Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Sr. Advocate

¶20

======================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER

¶22

2 21-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; learned AC

¶23

to Advocate General and learned counsel for the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts.

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.1214 of 2020(2) dt.21-01-2020 2/3

¶25

The petitioners have moved the Court for the following reliefs:

¶26

“(i) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the Notification vide memo no. 3763 dated 17.02.206 (Annexure-3) passed by the Chairman of Bihar State Board of Religious Trust, Patna (hereinafter called the Board) whereby and whereunder Under Section-32 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, (Hereinafter called the Act) the Trust committee has been constituted for managing administration of Sant Ashram Suraksha Nirman Samittee, Raja Khan, Biharsharif (nalanda) without following the mandatory provision of the Act & rules and without considering the fact that this organization is a NGO registered under section Registration Act, 1860 for socio-Economics Development of Society. It is not a religious organization or Religious Trust and as also this is and notification which has been issued by violating the law of principal of Natural justice.

¶27

(ii) To restrain the respondents authority to disturb the smooth functioning and states of the said Trus.

¶28

(iii) To hold and declare that said samittee is not a Religious Trust, and so it does not come in the frame of law of this Board.

¶29

(iv) To hold and declare that the action of the respondents authorities towards the said trust is bad in law which is generated due to malafide intention.

¶30

(v) To hold and declare that action of Respondent Board is without jurisdiction.

¶31

(vi) To grant any other reliefs for which petitioner is entitled to have.”

¶32

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.1214 of 2020(2) dt.21-01-2020 3/3

¶34

writ petition with liberty to move before appropriate forum.

¶35

Learned counsel for the respondents do not object.

¶36

In view thereof, as prayer for by learned counsel for

¶37

the petitioners, the writ petition stands disposed off with liberty aforesaid.

¶38

If the petitioners move before the appropriate forum, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶39

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

¶40

Anjani/-

¶41

Randhir Kumar, v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Randhir Kumar, v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Husna Khatun Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sumitra Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Bhajan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sakaldeep Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Shahina Khatoon @ Sahina Khatun Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.