Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute over the nomination of four members to the Board constituted under the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act 1956. The Act provides that these four members shall be nominated by the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded, a society registered under the Hyderabad Societies' Registration Act. The Diwan was also registered as a trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, which was upheld as final by the Supreme Court in 2014. In 2000, the State Government superseded the Board due to internal disputes. The State Government later sought to nominate members itself, leading to litigation. The Supreme Court held that the power to nominate under Section 6(1)(viii) vests exclusively in the Diwan as a society, and the State Government cannot nominate members in default. The court directed that the Diwan, as a society, shall nominate the four members within a specified period.
Headnote
A) Statutory Interpretation - Nomination of Board Members - Section 6(1)(viii) Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Act 1956 - The power to nominate four members to the Board is vested exclusively in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded, as a society registered under the Hyderabad Societies' Registration Act. The court held that the Diwan is a distinct legal entity and its nomination power cannot be usurped by any faction or interim body. (Paras 1-10)
B) Trust Law - Registration under Maharashtra Public Trusts Act - The registration of the Diwan as a trust under the MPT Act was upheld as final by this Court in 2014. The court held that the Diwan's status as a trust does not affect its statutory nomination power under the Nanded Act. (Paras 6-7)
C) Administrative Law - Supersession of Board - Effect on Nomination - The supersession of the Board by the State Government in 2000 did not affect the Diwan's power to nominate members under Section 6(1)(viii). The court held that the Diwan's nomination power is independent of the Board's functioning. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the power to nominate four members to the Board under Section 6(1)(viii) of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act 1956 vests in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded as a society, and whether the State Government can nominate members in default of nomination by the Diwan.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, holding that the power to nominate four members under Section 6(1)(viii) vests exclusively in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded as a society. The court directed the Diwan to nominate the four members within a period of two months from the date of the judgment.
Law Points
- Interpretation of statutes
- Nomination of members to statutory board
- Effect of supersession of board
- Role of registered society in statutory nomination
- Finality of registration under Maharashtra Public Trusts Act
Case Details
Civil Appeal No. 2964 of 2020 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 7217 of 2020) and connected appeals
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Sardar Manjieeth Singh Jagan Singh and Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeals arising from special leave petitions concerning the nomination of members to the Board under the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Act 1956.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought a declaration that the power to nominate four members under Section 6(1)(viii) vests exclusively in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded, and that the State Government cannot nominate members in default.
Filing Reason
Dispute over the nomination of four members to the Board after the State Government superseded the Board and sought to nominate members itself.
Previous Decisions
The Supreme Court in 2014 (Sardar Jeewansingh v. Shersingh) held that the registration of the Diwan as a trust under the MPT Act has attained finality.
Issues
Whether the power to nominate four members under Section 6(1)(viii) of the Nanded Act vests in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded as a society?
Whether the State Government can nominate members in default of nomination by the Diwan?
Whether the supersession of the Board affects the Diwan's nomination power?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the Diwan is a registered society and its nomination power under Section 6(1)(viii) is exclusive and cannot be exercised by any other body.
Respondents argued that the Diwan's registration as a trust under MPT Act supersedes its society status, and the State Government has power to nominate in default.
Ratio Decidendi
The statutory power of nomination under Section 6(1)(viii) of the Nanded Act is vested in the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded as a society registered under the Hyderabad Societies' Registration Act. This power is not affected by the Diwan's registration as a trust under the MPT Act or by the supersession of the Board. The State Government cannot nominate members in default as the Act provides for nomination by the Diwan only.
Judgment Excerpts
Under this provision, four members of the Board constituted under Section 5 are nominated by the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa Diwan, Nanded.
The court held that the Diwan is a distinct legal entity and its nomination power cannot be usurped by any faction or interim body.
Procedural History
The dispute originated from an application for registration of the Diwan as a trust under the MPT Act in 1981, which was allowed in 1982. Internal disputes led to the supersession of the Board by the State Government in 2000. The Supreme Court in 2014 upheld the finality of the Diwan's registration as a trust. The present appeals arise from special leave petitions challenging the State Government's attempt to nominate members to the Board.
Acts & Sections
- Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act, 1956: 2(c), 2(e), 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 22, 36, 37, 39, 53, 61
- Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950:
- Hyderabad Societies' Registration Act, 1350 Fasli:
