C.S.Tiwana, J. - (1.) The following question for determination has been referred to the full Bench "Whether the objections filed under Section 8 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act by the hereditary office-holder or twenty worshippers are liable to be dismissed straightway as the institution in dispute has not been alleged to be a Gurdwara."
(2.) The reference was made 'by the Division Bench consisting of myself and Prem Chand Jain, J., during the course of the hearing of an appeal under Section 16 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The appeal is on behalf of Balbir Dass and is directed against the order dated March 30, 1986, Passed by the Sikh Gurdwaras Tribunal whereby Gurdwara Sahib Dera Dewanian situated at Handisya in district Sangrur was declared to be a Sikh Gurdwara. Balbir Dass having died, his son and chela Sukhminder Dass continued with the appeal as a legal representative of the original appellant. An application was forwarded by fifty-six Sikh worshippers of the Gurdwara to the State Government and then a notification dated July 28, 1961, under S. 7(3) of the Act was published in the Punjab Government Gazette. Balbir Dass presented a petition dated October 16, 1961 to the Home Secretary under Section 8 of the Act and the same was then forwarded to the Tribunal for its disposal. Balbir Dass, hereinafter referred to as the appellant, asserted that no Gurdwara was in existence. He himself was said to be in possession of the Property of the Dera. He made this grievance that the notification under Section 7 of the Act had been got issued by some Sikh per sons who wanted to convert the Dera into a Gurdwara. It was further contended by him that he was the mohtmim of the property attached to the Dera In answer to the notices issued by the Tribunal neither those fifty-six worshippers who had made a move for the declaration of the Gurdwara as a Sikh Gurdware nor any of the one hundred end seventyfour objectors who had joined the appellant in raising the objections made their appearance before the Tribunal.. The petition of the appellant was only opposed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee which was impleaded as a respondent by the order of the Tribunal dated January 29, 1963. It raised this preliminary objection that the appellant had not claimed himself to be a hereditary office-holder so as to entitle him to file a petition under S. 8 of the Act. The appellant then presented an application for amendment which was allowed by the Tribunal. The appellant then introduced the following amendment at the end of the previous paragraph 1 of the petition:-- "The Dera and its property have devolved upon the petitioner from his Guiru Mahant Harbachan Dass. The petitioner is a hereditary officeholder and as such is entitled to make this petition." The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak committee being not satisfied with the claim of the appellant then couched its preliminary objection in the following words:- "The petitioner is not a hereditary office-holder according to the provisions of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act. He must show that succession to the office Mahant had devolved on 1-11-56 according to hereditary right. Each Gurdwara is bound by its own custom. The petition is silent about usage of this Gurdwara. The matter has not improved even by the amendment. Petition, therefore, merits dismissal on account of petitioner's admission in some paras of the petition." On merits of the case the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee urged that the Gurdwara had been established for the 'use' of the Sikh worshippers and was still being used as such. Thus the plea of the respondent in fact was that the Gurdwara in dispute was a Sikh Gurdwara which could be declared as such by taking into consideration the provisions of Section 16 of the Act.
(3.) At first the following preliminary issue was tried by the Tribunal:-- "Where the petitioner is a hereditary office-holder to entitle him to bring the Petition under Section 8 of the Sikh Gurdweres Art." This issue was decided in favour of the appellant by the Tribunal by an order dated March 23, 1965. Thereafter the following issue on merits was framed:- "Whether the. institution in dispute is a Sikh Gurdwara?" "This issue having been decided against the appellant, he alone and not any of the other worshippers felt aggrieved and filed the appeal in June, 1966.;