The Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur Bench) ruled that the mere establishment of a Dharmshala on the land purchased by the forefathers of the petitioners cannot be deemed to conclude that the land was allotted for charitable purposes and would be used for the said purpose only forever.
Though the Court admitted that a Dharmshala was constructed on the land in question at the inception but then, it is noted that a portion of the said land was acquired subsequently, and in lieu of the acquired land, an alternative land was allotted to the petitioners.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Rekha Borana reiterated that in the absence of any formal and written instrument to establish an endowment as a public trust, it cannot be concluded that there was any intention of dedicating land for charitable purposes, relinquishing the right of ownership. Reference was made to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Kuldeep Chand vs. Advocate General to the Government of H.P. [(2003) 5 SCC 46].
The Bench found from a perusal of the Patta that the land in question was sold out for Rs. 312 to Baijnath and Sargarmal in the year 1916, and the said Patta nowhere reflects that the land was sold out at a concessional rate. Further, there is no stipulation in the said Patta regarding its user. The Bench, therefore, discarded the opinion of the Commissioner, Devasthan Department, that the land in question was allotted/sold out at a concessional rate for charitable purposes.
Finding that 14000 sq. feet of land, as allotted in lieu of the acquired land, has been decided to be used by the petitioners for the establishment of a Dharmshala, and even a Trust Deed has been executed by the petitioners for that purpose, the Bench quashed the order passed by the Commissioner, Devasthan Department to the extent it holds that the land other than the land of Dharmshala (Trust) shall be treated as land of public trust as well as the partition undertaken amongst the family members of the petitioners by the orders of the civil court shall not come in the way of public trust.
Briefly, vide an order dated May 17, 2010, the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department, rejected an application under Section 17(2) of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and allowed petitioners for registration of the Trust in question. On appeal, the Commissioner held that the property, as directed to be registered in favour of the petitioners, would be declared to be a land of public trust for charitable purposes. The Appellate Authority also held that the decree for partition as granted by the Civil Court would not come in the way of the said order.
Appearances:
Senior Advocate Vikas Balia, along with Advocates Mudit Nagpal and Nishant Gaba, for the Petitioners
AAG B.L. Bhati, along with Advocates Sandeep Soni and Siddharth Mewara, for the Respondents
