Sardarni Daljeet Kaur vs Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management ...
1998 Latest Caselaw 1053 Del

JUDGMENT

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

1. The facts necessary for the appreciation of the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties in the application could be stated in the following terms:

2. It is common ground that the parties arc governed by the Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1971. Under the provisions of the Act, the persons who arc registered on the electoral roll for the election of the election of the Committee, are entitled to exercise their franchise for the election of the members of the "Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee". It consists of, it is stated at the Bar, about 51 members. This Committee which was constituted under the Act, passed a Resolution on the 28th of January, 1998 and the same reads as under:-

"The matter of all the managing committees and sub-committees functioning under the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee was put up for consideration and it was unanimously resolved that all the previous managing committees and sub-committees are dissolved and the President and General Secretary are empowered to constitute and dissolve the new managing committees and sub-committees. It is also resolved that until the new managing committees are not constituted, the President and General Secretary will run the management of all schools and colleges."

3. By virtue of this resolution, respondents 2 & 3, who are the President and the General Secretary respectively of the Committee, became entitled to constitute and dissolve new Management Committee/Committees. Acting on the strength of the delegation made by the Committee, respondents 2 & 3 passed a resolution on the 2nd of May, 1998 nominating some persons on the Governing Body of Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Khalsa Girls Senior Secondary School, Dev Nagar, New Delhi. The same reads as under

As per Resolution No. 2 dated 28.01.98 of Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee, the following have been nominated on Governing Body of Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Khalsa Sr. Sec. School (Girls), Dev Nagar, New Delhi.

1. Bibi Daljeet Kaur, Chairman

2. S.Jaswant Singh Deepak, Vice-Chairman

3. S.Bhag Singh Manager

4. S.Amar Singh Parmar Asstt. Manager

5. S.Roop Inder Singh Member 52/43, Ramjas Road

6. S.Amardev Singh Sethi Member

7. S.J.S.Bhatia Member D-26, Naraina Vihar

8. S.H.S.Walia Member WZ-422/8/4 Hari Nagar N.D.

9. S.Surjit Singh Member WZ-428, Nanak Pura, H.Nagar

10. S.S.T.S.Malhotra Member 5030/3, Sant Nagar

11. S.Sawroop Singh Member

12. S.Prehlad Singh Member

13. S.Inderjit Singh Gulati Member 62/6, Rajinder Nagar

14. S.Rajinder Pal Singh Member 19-B, Bazar Marg, Pusa Road

15. S.Mohinder Singh Sethi Member New Rajinder Nagar,

4. On the 8th of September, 1998, respondents 2 & 3 issued a letter to the petitioner staling that the Management Committee of the School stood dissolved with immediate effect. The letter dated 8.9.1998 reads as under:-

"You are hereby, informed that the Management Committee of your School stands dissolved with immediate effect.

During the interim period, the President and General Secretary of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee will function as the

Chairman and the Manager of your School until a new Management Committee is appointed."

5. This is challenged by the writ petitioner on two grounds--first, that the respondents 2 & 3 had no power to issue such a letter, and second, it is all arbitrary, colourable exercise of power and had been done with ulterior motives and it is against all principles of natural justice. The respondents 2 & 3 had filed the application for vacating the stay granted in CM.9617/98 on the 25th of September, 1998, on the ground that the letter issued by respondents 2 & 3 on the 8th of September, 1998 was in accordance with the Resolution dated 28.1.1998. The petitioner had no right to continue and the concept of following any principles of natural justice is alien to the right projected by the petitioner.

6. Mr.S.K. Luthra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that respondents 2 & 3 had acted in an arbitrary fashion; that once a Committee had been constituted and that Committee must continue and it cannot be dissolved at the whims and fancies of the respondents 2 & 3; and that no notice was given to the petitioner and other members of the Governing Body of the School before the letter was issued on the 8th of September, 1998. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.S.K. Luthra, submitted that false allegations have been made against the petitioner in the application for vacating the stay and the petitioner would vehemently deny all those allegations.

7. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3, Mr .Anil Amrit, submitted that the petitioner became a member of the Governing Body by virtue of the resolution passed by respondents 2 & 3 on the 2nd of May, 1998, which was on the basis of Resolution dated 28.1.1998, to which the petitioner was a party, and the Resolution dated 28.1.1998 is not challenged. When that is the factual position, the petitioner, who had been appointed as member of Chairman of the Governing Body by respondents 2 & 3, cannot say that respondents 2 & 3 had no power to issue the letter dated 8.9.1998. The learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Anil Amrit, submitted that respondents 2 & 3 are not obliged under law to issue any notice to the petitioner or any other members of the Governing Body and the power conferred on they by the Management Committee by its Resolution dated 28.1.1998 was absolute and unconditional and no restrictions have been imposed on them by the resolution, and, therefore, the petitioner, who is a member of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee, cannot challenge the act of respondents 2 & 3. I am inclined to agree with the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3. Once the resolution had been passed by the Delhi Gurdwaras Sikh Management Committee which gave absolute power to respondents 2 & 3, the petitioner cannot now challenge the act of respondents 2 & 3.

8. Another aspect that was debated was about the availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner under Section 32 of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1971. I do not want to deal with this contention and it is for the petitioner, if so advised, to avail any remedy available to her in law and under the provisions of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1971.

9. I am of the view, on the facts and circumstances, that the petitioner has not made out any prima facie case for stay. Accordingly, the CM is dismissed.

10. Post the writ petition for admission on the 5th of February, 1999.