Dinesh Pathak v. The Bihar State Religious Trust Board
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10147 of 2022 ====================================================== 1.
Dinesh Pathak Son of Late Ram Bilash Pathak Resident of Village and P.S. Purnahiya, District- Sheohar.
2.
Smt. Rekah Devi Wife of Dinesh Pathak Resident of Village and P.S. Purnahiya, District- Sheohar.
3.
Pravin Kumar @ Pravin Pathak Son of Dinesh Pathak Resident of Village and P.S. Purnahiya, District- Sheohar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Bihar State Religious Trust Board Vidyapati Marg, Patna through its President.
2.
Sri Akhilesh Kumar Jain, President, Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna.
3.
The First Assistant Superintendent Bihar State Religious Trust Board, Vidyapati Marg, Patna.
4.
Sanjay Kumar Sahani Son of Late Chhathu Sahani Resident of Village and P.S.- Purnahiya, District- Sheohar.
5.
Sri Ram Janaki Thakurbari at village and P.S.- Purnahiya, District- Sheohar through its Mahanth Prabhu Sharma Das.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Yogendra Mishra, Sr. Advocate Mr. Uma Kant Tiwary, Advocate Ms. Swati Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent no.5 :
Mr.Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Trust Board :
Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 07-08-2023 Heard Mr. Uma Kant Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel for the Trust Board.
The petitioner has rushed to this Court challenging the memo no. 1167 dated 28.6. 2021 passed by the Bihar State Religious Trust Board (henceforth for short 'the Trust Board') by which he has been put on notice to appear with all the
Patna High Court CWJC No.10147 of 2022(4) dt.07-08-2023 2/2 documents.
The matter relates to 'Shreeram Janki Thakurbari', Purnahia, in the district of Sheohar.
Learned Senior Counsel has made a preliminary objection stating that whatever grievance the petitioner has, he can appear and submit the same as this is just a notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already submitted all the documents but 'the Trust Board' has chosen not to pass any order.
In that view of the matter and the fair submission put forward by the learned for the petitioner, this Court directs 'the Trust Board' to decide the matter within a period of three months from today, if the same still has not been decided after giving the opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. Needless to say that the question raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the jurisdiction of 'the Trust Board' in issuing the present notice has to be answered before a final decision is taken.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U