Supreme Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 and Its Application to a Religious Trust Governed by a Scheme Framed by a Court Outside Bihar. The Court Held that Section 4(5) of the Act Validly Excluded the Applicability of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to Religious Trusts in Bihar, Thereby Ousting the Jurisdiction of Courts in Other States Over Such Trusts.

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a notice issued under Section 59 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, and seeking a declaration that the Act was unconstitutional and did not apply to the Baidyanath temple.

The respondent, as writ petitioner, sought quashing of the notice issued by the President of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts and a declaration that the Act did not apply to the temple because it was governed by a scheme framed by courts outside Bihar.

The President of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts asked the respondent to furnish a statement about the Baidyanath temple and its properties under Section 59 of the Act; the respondent contended that the temple was administered under a scheme made by the District Judge of Burdwan and approved by the Calcutta High Court, and therefore the Act did not apply.

The Patna High Court had adjudicated the matter in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 181 of 1953, leading to the present appeal by the State of Bihar; the Supreme Court was hearing the appeal from the High Court's judgment and order dated October 9, 1953.

Whether the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 was ultra vires the Bihar State Legislature. Whether the Bihar Legislature had legislative competence over the Baidyanath temple when some of its properties were situated outside Bihar. Whether the Act applied to the temple despite the fact that it was administered under a scheme framed by the District Judge of Burdwan and approved by the Calcutta High Court. Whether Section 4(5) of the Act, which excluded the application of Section 92 CPC to religious trusts in Bihar, was valid. Whether the Act suffered from extra-territorial operation.

Respondent argued that the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 was ultra vires the Bihar Legislature under the Constitution. Respondent contended that the Bihar Legislature lacked competence because some properties of the trust were outside Bihar. Respondent asserted that the Act did not apply because the temple was governed by a scheme made by courts outside Bihar, and the Act's provisions would interfere with the jurisdiction of those courts, giving it extra-territorial operation. State of Bihar argued that the Act was intra vires the Bihar Legislature, relying on Mahant Moti Das v. S.P. Sahi. State argued that the Bihar Legislature was competent to legislate on religious trusts situated in Bihar even if some properties lay outside, relying on State of Bihar v. Charusila Dasi. State contended that Section 4(5) of the Act validly excluded Section 92 CPC, and therefore the Act applied to the temple without extra-territoriality.

A State Legislature has legislative competence to enact laws for religious trusts situated within its territorial limits, even if some trust properties are located outside the State. Section 4(5) of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, which excludes the application of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to religious trusts in Bihar, is valid and within legislative competence. By virtue of this exclusion, religious trusts in Bihar are taken out of the purview of Section 92 CPC, thereby terminating the jurisdiction of courts outside Bihar that had previously exercised control under that section, and the Act does not suffer from extra-territorial operation.

The Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, is intra vires the Bihar State Legislature Mahant Moti Das v. S. P. Sahi, [1959] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 563 followed. It is competent to the Bihar Legislature to legislate in respect of religious trusts situate in Bihar though some of the properties belonging to the trust may be outside Bihar; State of Bihar v. Charusila Dasi, [1959] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 601 followed. The provision of law in sub-s. (5) of s. 4 Of the Act by which s. 92 Of the Code of Civil Procedure shall not apply to any religious trust in the State of Bihar, is valid. As under s. 4(5) Of the Act religious trusts in Bihar are taken out of the purview of s. 92 Of the Code of Civil Procedure, the jurisdiction of the District judge of Burdwan or the Calcutta High Court to deal with the temple in question under s. 92 comes to an end; consequently the Act and its several provisions do not suffer from the vice of extra-territoriality and the Act applies to the temple in question and the properties appertaining thereto.

In 1897, a suit under Section 539 (now Section 92) of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed in the court of the District Judge of Burdwan regarding the Baidyanath temple; a decree dated July 4, 1901, framed a scheme for management. The scheme was confirmed by the Calcutta High Court and later modified in 1909-1910, with further directions given by the Calcutta High Court in 1912. The Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, received the President's assent on February 21, 1951, and came into force on August 15, 1951. In August 1952, the President of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts issued a notice under Section 59 of the Act to the respondent. The respondent filed a writ petition under Article 226 in the Patna High Court, Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 181 of 1953, challenging the notice and the validity of the Act. The Patna High Court rendered its judgment on October 9, 1953. The State of Bihar appealed to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 236 of 1954.

• Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 (Bihar I of 1951): Sections 3, 4(5), 28, 29, 59
• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908): Section 92
• Constitution of India: Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25, 26, 27