JATINDRA NATH SINGHA Vs. ASSAM BOARD OF REVENUE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SWAMI Abhayananda Tirtha claimed by the Petitioner to be a great religious saint had come from pilgrimage to the Holy temple of Kamakhya at the turn of this century. The solemn atmosphere and religious sanctuary of the temple deeply impressed the saint. He ultimately decided to make Kamakhya as his permanent abode and established an ashram to use the same as a centre of meditation and religious studies and worship. It is a pity that the disciples of this Ashram are at loggerheads, and that too for claiming mutation for 10B of odd land covered by Khatian No. 20 of dag No. 513 (old), 210 (new). There cannot be two opinions that private interest has to yield to the interest of the institution.

(2.) THERE is no dispute that during 1923 -28 Settlement names of (1) Abhayananda Swami, (2) Jogendra Nath Panda and (3) Lakshi Kanta Mahanta were recorded as under raiyats desting all of them as disciples of Kailashnanda Swami. During simple -settlement operation of 1944 -46 names of Jogendra and (sic) continued, but in place of Abhayananda Swami, we find (sic) of Upendra Nath Brahamachari who, as per the Petitioner, (sic) succeded swami Abhayananda as per the last will and desire of Swamiji as the Guru of the Ashram. Be it mentioned that (sic) these three names had found place as raiyats on behalf of the Abhayanda Ashram.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved at this order, Dhiren and heirs of (sic) and Golok preferred an appeal before the learned Assam Board of Revenue who by impugned order has set aside the order of Settlement Officer. The learned Board has held that (sic) Settlement Officer had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed on 28.5.68 either under Section 151 of the 151 of the Assam (sic) and Revenue Regulation (for short the Regulation) or under Rule 82H of the Settlement Rules. It also accepted the case Respondent 6 to 14 (hereinafter, the Respondents) that the (sic) Deben, Dhireadra and Golok has been recorded in tendency Khatiant by virtue of "right of inheritance" from Jogendra and Lakshi. The learned Board has has also set aside ex -parte order passed by the Sub -Deputy Collector (S.D.C.) 10.6.69 to K.P. case No. 421 of 1968 -69 by which the name of the Petitioner was entered in the khatian by "right of inheritance" in place of others on behalf of the Abhayan.