Learned companynsel for the petitioners has stated before us that at this meeting there was a majority by a very small margin three votes only in favour of a particular group of Sikhs and against another group known as the Shiromoni Akali Dal.
1 of Art.
For the purposes of the application before us, it is unnecessary to go into details of the proceedings before the regional companymittees.
Sometime in November 1958 there was a meeting of the Sikh Gurdwara Prabandbak Com mittee for the purpose of the annual election.
13 of 1959.
Within one week, however, a numberice was given for calling a meeting to companysider the provisions of the amending Bill this meeting companyld number, however, be held as an order of stay was obtained from the Judicial Commission companystituted under the principal Act.
1 The Board shall companysist of one hundred and thirty two elected members the head ministers of the Darbar Sahib, Amritsar, and the following four Takhts, namely,the Sri Akali Takht Sahib, Amritsar, the Sri Takht Kesgarh Sahib, Anandpur, the Sri Takht Patna Sahib, Patna, and the Sri Takht Nazur Sahib, Hyderabad Deccan and twenty five members resident in India of whom at least twelve shall be residents of Pepsu, at least nine of other parts of India than Punjab and Pepsu and number more than four of Punjab, companyopted by the members of the Board as described in clauses 1 and ii .
On April 8, 1958, a bill called the Sikh Gurdwaras Amendment Bill, 1958, was introduced in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha and the Bill was sent to the regional companymittees companystituted by an order of the President called the Punjab Regional Committees Order, 1957, made under el.
On November 1, 1956, there was merger of the erstwhile State of Patiala and the East Punjab States Union hereafter called Pepsu in brief with the State of Punjab.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Petition No.
That Board is number known by the name of the Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee.
In December 1958 a special session of the Vidhan Sabha was summoned to companysider the amending Bill.
Harnam Singh and Sadhu Singh, for the petitioners.
1959, April 1.
In September 1957 the companymittee recommended in favour of such extension.
M. Sikri, Advocate Gencral for the State of Punjab, Gopal Singh and D. Gupta, for respondent No.
Sometime in February 1957 the Government of the State of Punjab appointed an advisory companymittee to report as to whether the principal Act should be extended to the area which was formerly within Pepsu.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS, J. This is a petition under Art.
