Conviction Cannot Stand On Contradictory Police Testimony Without Medical Evidence: Calcutta High Court Acquits Accused In 1993 Rioting Case Criminal Law Cannot Be Used to Criminalise Governance Decisions: Punjab & Haryana High Court Discharges Bhupinder Singh Hooda in AJL Plot Case Money Laundering Is A Continuing Offence; Even Persons Not Named In Predicate FIR Can Be Prosecuted: Jharkhand High Court Refuses To Discharge Accused In ₹13.29 Crore PMLA Case Failure To Obtain Demarcation To Ascertain Location Of Boundary Wall Fatal To Injunction Suit, Adverse Inference Must Be Drawn: Himachal Pradesh High Court When Cost Of Acquisition Is Incapable Of Determination, Capital Gains Tax Cannot Arise: Gujarat High Court On Transfer Of Self-Generated Trademarks Tenant Cannot Turn Residential Portion of SCF into Commercial Workshop Without Permission: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Eviction Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 | ‘Saved Permits’ Exempt From 140km Cap Until KSRTC Introduces Service: Kerala High Court Surplus Land Proceedings Cannot Be Reopened After Decades Through Civil Suit: Punjab & Haryana High Court Where Two Promotional Avenues Exist, Higher Grade Must Follow the Lowest Promotional Post: Gujarat High Court Rejects Class-IV Employees’ Claim for Tradesman Pay Scale Congress MLA's Election Void For Hiding Criminal Cases: MP High Court Documents Not Foreign To Pleadings Can Be Produced During Cross-Examination: Bombay High Court Act Nowhere Mandates Certificate By Treating Doctor : Bombay High Court Revives Workman’s Compensation Claim Doctrine of Laches Is a Rule of Practice, Not a Rule of Law: Supreme Court's Comprehensive Restatement in Mizo Chiefs Case Confirmed Auction Sale Not Immune From Scrutiny on Valuation: Supreme Court Upholds Remand to DRT, Protects Bona Fide Purchaser's Rights Excise Constable Convicted for Demanding Rs. 500 Bribe Cannot Escape on 35-Year-Old Technicalities: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction, Modifies Sentence Considering Age Mere Acquaintance With Complainant Cannot Make a Witness 'Interested': Supreme Court Sets Clear Bar for Discrediting Prosecution Witnesses in Corruption Cases Sole Testimony Without Corroboration Unsafe For Conviction In Delayed Rape FIR: Supreme Court Acquits Four ED Cannot Freeze Entire Company Accounts When Sole Surviving FIR Involves Only Rs.42 Lakhs: Karnataka High Court Mahanta Cannot Sue in Personal Name for Math Property: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree

Temple – In the ownership column, the name of the deity alone is required to be mentioned, as the deity being a juristic person is the owner of the land :SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


SEPTEMBER 6, 2021 

The writ petition was filed by Association of Priests registered under the M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam 1973. Such society has 251 members in the Districts of Dhar, Indore, Ratlam, Shajapur, Ujjain, Jhabua etc. The challenge was to quash the circulars dated 21.03.1994 and 07.06.2008 whereby the names of Pujari were ordered to be deleted from the revenue record. Pujaris have rights only with respect to either cultivate the land or get it cultivated through servants. The High Court further held that if the temple was managed by the Pujari, then keeping in view the law laid down from time to time, his name was required to be mentioned along with the name of the deity. The State of Maharashtra deleted the names of Pujari from the revenue record so as to protect the temple properties from unauthorized sale by the Pujaris. The Khasgi Trust was formed for the purpose of the properties of Holkar family and not land belonging to the temple. The Pujaris have been conferred Bhumiswami (ownership) rights, a right which cannot be taken away by executive instructions. The reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court in Shri Krishna v. State of M.P. Priest does not fall in any of the clauses as mentioned in Section 158(1)(b) of the Gwalior Code. Even Inam granted by the Jagirdar or the ruler to a priest is only to manage the property of the temple and not confer ownership right on the priest. In Ghanshyamdas II, it was held that even if temple was being managed by Pujari, his name is required to be. along with name of deity. In terms of Section 108, 109 and 110 of the Code, Rules had been framed initially as Appendix X. Later such Rules were substituted by another Rules published on 15.5.1964 and Form I was prescribed to maintain the records of the rights. The Collector of Pembrokeshire has published a set of rules for the preparation of the Khasra (village register) for each village in his circle. The khasra will be written up in the field by the Patwari after local enquiry and actual inspections. A separate entry shall be made for every plot, and every plot whether cultivated or not. The Writ petition is thus dismissed and the appeal is allowed. 

The STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. 

VS  

PUJARI UTTHAN AVAM KALYAN SAMITI & ANR. 

 

Latest Legal News