Pannalal Bansilal Patil Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Case: Pannalal Bansilal Patil v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Citation: AIR 1996 SC 1023

Bench:

• Hon’ble Justice RAMASWAMY
• Hon’ble Justice K. RAMASWAMY
• Hon’ble Justice K. HANSARIA B.L

Petitioner: Pannalal Bansilal Patil

Respondent: State of Andhra Pradesh

Relevant Cases: The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras vs. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt (1954) S.C.R. 1005

Facts:

1. The Petitioner is a founder of some charitable and religious institutions in Hyderabad and Andhra Pradesh. He is a hereditary trustee of Raja Bahadur Sir Bansilal Motilal Charitable Trust founded by his father donating Rs. 5, 00,000/- in 1933.
2. He is a hereditary trustee and is entitled to nominate other trustees for proper management. He has been properly and efficiently maintaining the above stated trusts and charitable or religious institutions without any complaint.
3. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 recognised his hereditary right and made him Chairman of the respective trusts, in the event of constituting a board of trustees with non- hereditary trustees.
4. The petitioner alleged that the Act, while regulating administration of Hindu charitable and religious institutions or endowment violates the Constitutional rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Articles 25 and 26 guarantee Freedom to manage religious affairs and right to freely practise the religion to all citizens.

Issues involved:

• Whether the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 violates Article 25 and 26 of Indian Constitution?

Rationale:

• Section 16 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 put an end to the inherited trusteeship.
• Section 17 talks about ‘How and for what tenure a trustee is appointed.’
• Section 144 of the Act deals with ‘Ceasing of allowance authorised to any trustee.’
• It is necessary to take a note that Section 16 doesn’t abolish the original right to trusteeship but the hereditary one. Its aim is to eliminate bias on grounds of heredity.
• Section 15, 17, 18, 19 grants ‘A right to every eligible Hindu to claim designation as trustee. It states criteria for trusteeship, appointment of trustees and composition of the board of trustees to have systematic management and governance of the institution and endowment.’ Therefore, the abolition of the right to hereditary trusteeship cannot be declared to be unconstitutional.
• The main focus of the Act is to cease the misuse of a trust for personal gain. It is a matter of legislative policy. It is not a dispute that the legislature has no competence to abolish the system of payment.
• The Court would give consideration and priority to the legislative judgment, instead of judicial conclusion. Therefore Section 144 is not unconstitutional as regards charitable and religious endowments.

Obiter Dicta:

The Court in its judgement further talks about the powers and duties of the trustees regulated in the Act.

“Section 23 includes powers of the trusses. The trustee of every charitable or religious institution has to manage its affairs, properties and apply its funds as per the terms of the trust, the usage of the institution, and all lawful directions which an eligible authority may issue in respect thereof.

Section 24 describes duties of the trustees. Section 25 deals with a fix amount of expenditure known as dittam. Section 26 prescribes powers over trustee of charitable or religious institution . Section 27 authenticates acts of trustees or board of trustees despite fault in their performance thereof. Section 30 and 31 relate to appointment of Engineering staff, Architect. Section 29 deals with designation and duties of Executive officers whereas Section 32 with appointment of subordinate officers.”

Judgement:

The Court verifies the validity of Sections 15, 16, 17, and 144 of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966. The Writ petitions and the transfer cases are disposed off accordingly.

Conclusion:

The above mentioned case discuss about the Constitutional validity of Sections 15, 16, 17, and 144 of The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments act, 1966.

The Petitioner challenges that these Sections violates Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution which guarantees the freedom to manage religious affairs and right to freely practise the religion to all citizens.

The court dismissed his petition stating that the main focus of the Act is to cease the misuse of a trust for personal gain and protecting the right of trusteeship.

Drafted By: Param Mansinghka

Edited By: Tanvi Mahajan, Publisher, Law Insider

Published On: February 16, 2022 at 21:00 IST