On or about December 23, 1957, Gopal Das and some others describing themselves as members of the public, Barnala, made an application that since Ramji Das was dead, new arrangements should be made for the proper management of the dharmasala which is used for the benefit of the public.
This recommendation was affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, who wrote to the Punjab Government for necessary sanction of the recommendation.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
24 of 1960.
The petitioners are sons, grand sons and daughter of one Lala Ramji Das, and widow of one Tara Chand, a predeceased son of Lala Ramji Das.
226 of the Constitution in the Punjab High Court, which was rejected on the preliminary ground that the matter involved disputed questions of fact.
Petition under Art.
B. Aggarwala and K. P. Gupta, for the petitioners.
S. Bindra and D. Gupta, for respondents Nos.
The case of the petitioners in short is that Lala Ramji Das, who died in 1957, had built the dharmasala, temple and shops out of the funds of the joint family companysisting of himself and the petitioners near about the year 1909 and during his life time managed the dharmasala, temple and shops on behalf of the joint family.
The dharmasala was built for the benefit of the traveling public and was used as a rest house by travelers three deities were installed in the temple and members of the public offered worship therein, though there was numberformal dedication and the shops were let out on rent for the upkeep of the dharmasala and temple.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS, J. This is a writ petition under Art.
32 of the Constitution in respect of a dharmasala, an adjoining temple and some appurtenant shops, standing on a piece of land near the railway station at Barnala, district Sangrur, in the State of Punjab.
April 19.
L. Mehta and K. L. Hathi, for respondent No.
1, 2 and 4.
The petitioners then made an application under Art.
They allege that after the Sri death of Ramji Das they came into possession of the properties in question but in January, 1958, the respondents, namely, the State of Punjab, some of its officials and the Municipal Committee, Barnala, by force and without any authority of law dispossessed them from the dharmasala in question and further deprived them of the companytrol and management of the said dharmasala and temple and are seeking to interfere with their management and companytrol of the shops appurtenant thereto.
This led to fresh researches into the old papers, and this time the Sub Divisional Officer, Barnala, recommended that in the interest of Government sometime before this Barnala companye into the Punjab State the Municipal Committee, Barnala, should take immediate charge of the management of the dharmasala.
