- (1.) Dera Sullar through its Mahant, Jaspal Dass Chela of late Shri Mahant Brahm Rattan, a Udasin religious and charitable institution, through present petition filed by it under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks writ in the nature of certiorari so as to quash proclamation notices, Annexure P-9 and P-10, that have been issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala and circulated by Sub Division Officer (Civil), Patiala. Before however, the grounds on which the relief, as mentioned above, are adverted to, it shall be necessary to give resume of the facts culminating into this writ.
(2.) The case of petitioner Institution as culled out from the pleadings is that Sullar Udasi Institution known as 'Dera Sullar', which is religious and charitable Institution for Udasin Sampardai, exists in the revenue estate of village Sullar, District Patiala and Jaspal Dass is the present Mahant of this Institution. The Gaddi of Mahantship of this Institution has always been with the hereditary Mahant and the succession has been devolving from Guru to Chela. Mahant Lachhman Dass was succeeded by his Chela Mahant Braham Gian, who in turn was succeeded by his Chela Mahant Braham Rattan, who died on April 4, 1974. During his lifetime, Mahant Braham Rattan executed a registered Will in favour of Jaspal Dass, who is his Chela and he was further nominated to be Mahant after the death of Mahant Braham Rattan. According to customs and rituals of the Udasin Sampardai, in the congregation of Mahants, Sants and local inhabitants, Mahant Jaspal Dass was duly installed as Mahant of the Institution and mutation of succession was sanctioned in his favour by the Assistant Collector IInd Grade on April 26, 1974. The same has been placed on the records of this case as Annexure P-1, Maharaja Patiala late Shri Bhupinder Singh had bestowed a grant of Muafi i.e. exemption of payment of land revenue and a Sanad Muafi was granted by the Commissioner, Settlement on May, 1908 in favour of petitioner-Institution. Mahant Jaspal Dass was minor at the time of his appointment as Mahant and he was, thus, brought up under the traditions of the Udasin Sampardai by his mother, who also happened to be widow of late Mahant Braham Rattan. He was only three years old when he was so appointed. At the time when he filed the present petition, he was 21 years of age. It is he, who through his mother earlier and now himself was managing the affairs of the Institution as its lawful Mohatmim and there was no invasion on his rights, title and interest during all these years nor had there been ever any interference from any quarter, whatsoever. However, Mahant Ram Sarup Dass- respondent No. 5 started proclaiming himself to be Mahant of the Institution by asserting himself to be Chela of late Mahant Braham Rattan. He asserted his right by way of civil suit that he filed against Mahant Jaspal Dass as also his mother for possession in the year 1977. The burden of the plaint was that he had succeeded to the petitioner institution as its Mahant and that Mahant Jaspal dass or his mother had nothing to do with it. On the pleadings of the parties, one of the issues that were framed by the Civil Court, was as to whether Mahant Jaspal Dass was Chela of deceased Mahant Braham Rattan and was appointed as Mahant of the institution and which appointment was approved by the Bhaikh and inhabitants of the village and worshipers. This issue, it is pleaded, was determined in favour of Mahant Jaspal Dass and against respondent No. 5. The suit instituted by respondent No. 5 was, thus, dismissed on November 25, 1985. Aggrieved, thus, dismissed on November 25, 1985. Aggrieved, he filed an appeal which too was dismissed on January 30, 1987. Before the matter is proceeded any further, it shall be useful to see the real controversy involved in the civil suit, referred to above. After the death of Mahant Braham Rattan, as he was admitted to be duly appointed Mahant or Mohtmim of the Institution, respondent No. 5 in his civil suit pleaded that he being the sole Chela of said Mahant Braham Rattan, was entitled to the possession of the Dera and the properties attached thereto. The averments made in the plaint further reveal that it was the case of respondent No. 5 that after the death of Braham Rattan, when he was away on pilgrimage and came back only in January, 1975, he was installed as the Mahant of the Dera by the Bheikh and other inhabitants of the village and since then he was the Mahant of the Dera, thus, was entitled to obtain possession of the same and the properties attached to it. He was about one year old when he fell ill and there was no hope of his survival. He was brought to Braham Rattan, who was at that time the Mahant of the Dera. Braham Rattan then placed him in the middle of a circle of bushes and set those bushes on fire and cited some Mantras. Thereafter, he asked the parents of respondent No. 5 to pick him up but they did not do so. Rather he was picked up from that fire by Mahant Braham Rattan himself. Consequently, his parents gave him to Mahant Braham Rattan. It is pleaded that he started living in the Dera in 1953 and was installed as Chela by Braham Rattan, at Haridwar after the performance of due ceremonies. After the death of Braham Rattan, his wife Mst. Darshana Devi claimed the property on behalf of her minor son, Jaspal Dass, on the ground that he was Chela of Braham Rattan deceased. Mutations of the disputed property were also got sanctioned in favour of Jaspal Dass, minor. It was in these circumstances that it was averred that Jaspal Dass had no right or title to inherit the disputed property or to become Chela of Mahant Braham Rattan. Claim of respondent No. 5 was hotly contested. The pleadings of the parties gave rise to many issues, some of which, that have bearing upon the controversy involved in this writ, are as under:- "(1) Whether the plaintiff is the only Chela of deceased Mahant Braham Rattan ? (2) Whether the plaintiff was installed as the Mahant of the dera in question by the Bheikh in habitation of the village ? (4) Whether the defendant No. 1 is incapable of becoming a Chela being a child as alleged in the plaint ? (6) Whether defendant No. 1 was Chela of deceased Mahant Braham Rattan and was appointed as Mahant of the Dera by registered Will dated 27.3.1974 by deceased Mahant and his appointment has been approved by Bheikh and inhabitants of village and worshipers ? If so, its effect ?" The trial Court returned the findings on the aforesaid issues in favour of Jaspal Dass and against respondent No. 5. These findings were confirmed by the first Appellate Court in an appeal that was preferred by respondent No. 5.
(3.) Issue No. 1, as referred to above, was determined against respondent No. 5 with the following concluding paragraph:- "In these circumstances, there was hardly any question of the plaintiff being the Chela of Brahm Rattan deceased nor was there any question of Brahm Rattan deceased treating him his Chela. From the copies of plaints, Exs. DW4/A and DW4/B file by Brahm Rattan deceased against the plaintiff and others as also from the recitals in the registered Will, Ex. DW1/A, made by Brahm Rattan deceased in favour of his minor son, Jaspal Dass, defendant No. 1 it is evident that the plaintiff was never made Chela of Brahm Rattan deceased and the contention of the plaintiff that he was the Chela of Brahm Rattan deceased is totally false and baseless. This issue is, accordingly, found and decided against the plaintiff." After elaborate discussion, Issue No. 2 was concluded with the following paragraph :- "I hold that the plaintiff has no concern with the Dera and the property attached to the same nor can he claim to have been validly installed as Mahant of the Dera by the Bheikh and other residents of the when Jaspal Dass minor defendant had already been validly appointed to that office. This issue is, accordingly, found and decided against the plaintiff." Under Issue No. 4, it was held that "the plaintiff had no concern with the Dera in question nor had he got any locus standi to challenge the appointment of Jaspal Dass, defendant No. 1 as Mahant of that he was the son of Brahm Rattan deceased, was no disqualification for being appointed him as Mahant of the Dera. There is no evidence on record whether there were any special ceremonies attached to the office of Mahant of the Dera which could not be performed by a minor either personally or through his guardian. In fact, any person including a minor could be appointed as Mahant of the Dera and Jaspal Dass being the child can Chela of Brahm Rattan deceased was validly appointed as Mahant of the Dera." After lengthly discussion Issue No. 6 was concluded by the following lines :- "As a result of the aforesaid discussion, I hold that Jaspal Dass, minor defendant No. 1was validly appointed as Chela by Brahm Rattan deceased in his lifetime and he also nominated him as h is successor by means of a registered Will dated 23.3.1974, Ex. DW1/A and after the demise of Brahm Rattan aforesaid, his son and Chela Jaspal Dass defendant No. 1 was validly installed as Mahant of the Dera by the Bheikh and other residents of the village and the plaintiff has no locus standi to challenge the same. This issue is, accordingly, found and decided n favour of the defendants and against the plaintiff.";