http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

PETITIONER: MEWA SINGH & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       10/12/1998

BENCH: S. Saghir Ahmad, D.P. Wadhwa.

JUDGMENT:

D.P.Wadhwa.  J.

       Leave granted.

       There are 4 appellants.  All are  employees  of  the respondent Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), a body  constituted  under  the  Sikh  Gurdwara Act, 1925 (for short, the ’Act’).    They  were,  however,  dismissed  from service by  order  dated  January 13, 1996.  They approached the Punjab and Haryaba High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.  High Court, by the  impugned  judgment dated  April  18,  1998, refused to grant any relief to them and rather told them to avail  alternative  remedy  provided under  Section  1.42 of the Act by filing appeal against the orders  of  dismissal  to   the   Sikh   Gurdwara   Judicial Commission.   Aggrieved these four employees have approached this Court.

       Appellants contend that not only that the High court wrongly   refused  to  exercise  its  jurisdiction  but  the impugned judgment is contrary to its earlier Division  Bench decision in   Ajaib   Singh  vs.    The  Shiromani  Gurdwara Prabhandhak Committee (CWP No.  7236  of  19960  decided  on October 3, 1996 wherein the High Court held that Section 142 did not provide any alternative remedy to dismissed employee of the respondent.

       It is alleged that on June 3, 1995  appellants  were given  the  duty of taking pious saroop from Darbar Sahib to Calcutta.  They were issued charge  sheets  on  November  9, 1995  for committing had acts during journey to Calcutta and for consuming liquor.  The appellants filed their  reply  to the  charge  sheets  explaining  therein  that the charge of taking liquor etc.    was  not  true.    President  of   the respondent  after  considering  the  replies  filed  by  the appellants passed and order on December 16, 1995 imposing  a fine on  them.   The appellants, it is stated, deposited the fine.  In  pursuance  to  the  order  of  the  President  of respondent  the  appellants were re-instated in the service. When the matter stood concluded, the Executive Committee  of the  reapondent,  it  appears,  book up the matter again and without holding  any  further  proceedings  by  order  dated January  30,  1996  dismissed  the  appellants from service. Appellants state that their dismissal  is  wrong  as  it  is against  the  service  rules framed by the respondent and by filing writ petition in the High Court they sought  quashing

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

of their  orders  of  dismissal.   They submitted that under Rule 4 of the Service Rules an appeal lies to the  Executive Committee  against the order of punishment by the Preesident of the respondent.  Under the Rules Executive  Committee  of the  respondent  is  Appellate authority, The appellants did not file any appeal before the Executive Committee  and  it, therefore,   could   not   assume   jurisdiction  and  order punishment of dismissal, particularly  when  no  inquiry  as contemplated under Rule 4 was held.  Respondent said that it was  not  amenable to the jurisdiction of the High Court and that the appellants, id they felt aggrieved, could challenge the orders of the Executive  Committee  by  approaching  the Judicial Commission  under  Section  142  of the Act.  It is also stated that appeal  lies  to  the  Judicial  Commission under  Rule  4(b)  of the Service Rules framed under Section 132 which have been framed in  exercise  of  powers  of  the respondent under Section 69 of the Act.  The respondent then says that Rule 4(b) was wrongly translated by the appellants and that its correct translation is as under :-         "(b) any employee  under  the  control  of         management any department and Gurdwara may         prefer  an appeal against any order of any         punishment, (suspension, dismissal,  fine,         warning etc,) within 30 days from the date         that order is passed.

       (i)     any  employee  of  the  Shiromani         Committee can be dismissed or degraded for         his  bad character, drinking or becoming a         ’Patit’  but  before   he   dismissed   or         degraded,  the  allegations in the form of         written charge sheet shall be supplied  to         him    along   with   the   statement   of         allegations, on the  basis  of  which  the         charges    are   levelled   against   him.         Representation against these charges shall         be  received  from  the  employee   within         reasonable  time  and  in  case  he denies         these charges and  prays  for  holding  an         enquired  into  in  the  presence  of  the         employee and for each item of  the  charge         sheet,   which   has  not  been  admitted,         evidence shall be recorded in his presence         and the employees  shall  be  entitled  to         cross-examine these witnesses.  In case an         employee  wishes  to  produce his defence,         the same shall be entertained, but in case         if  the  inquiry  committee   feels   that         certain  witnesses  are  not necessary for         evidence, it shall not be permitted to  be         produced for the reasons to be recorded in         writing.   Action  shall  be taken against         the employees  only  when  the  charge  is         established.

       The appreciate rival contentions of the  parties  it may  be  useful  to  refer to certain provisions of the Act. Under Section 40, for the purpose of the Act there shall  be constituted  a  Board and for every Notified Sikh Gurdeara a committee of management and there shall also be  constituted from  time  ti  time  a  Judicial  Commission  in the manner provided in the Act.  The management of every Notified  Sikh Gurdwara  shall be administered by the Committee constituted thereof, the Board and the Commission in accordance with the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

provisions contained in Part III of the Act.  Chapter VI  in Part III provides that the Board shall be known by such name as  may  be decided upon at the general meeting of the first Board constituted under the provisions of  the  Act.    This Chapter   contains   provisions   for  the  composition  and constitution of the Board.  Section 62 provides  as  to  how Executive  Committee  of  the  Board  is  to be constituted. Under Section 64, the Executive Committee of the Board shall exercise on behalf of the Board all powers conferred on  the Board  by  the provisions of the Act which are not expressly reserved to  be  exercised  by  the  Board  in  its  general meeting.   There  is also provision for delegation of powers of the Committee to sub-committee.  Then under  Section  69, the  Executive  Committee  is empowered to appoint employees and prescribe their duties.  Section 42, 64, 69, 132 and 142 are as under :-

       "42.  Name of Board.    -  (1)  The  Board         shall  be  known  by  such  name as may be         decided upon at a General Meeting  of  the         1st Board constituted under the provisions         of  this  Act, provided that not less than         three-fifths of the members present at the         meeting have voted in favour of  the  name         selected,  and  that  such  name  has been         approved by the State Government.

       (2) If the Board fails to select a name in         accordance   with   the   provisions    of         sub-section  (1)  or  the name selected is         not approved by the State  Government  the         Board shall be designed the Central Board.

       (3) The Board shall by such name be a body         corporate  and  shall  have  a   perpetual         succession  and a common seal and shall by         such name sue and be sued.

       64.   Powers  of  executive  committee  of         Board The Executive Committee of the Board         shall exercise on behalf of the Board  all         powers  conferred  on  the  Board  by  the         provisions  of  this  Act  which  are  not         expressly  reserved to be exercised by the         Board in  general  meeting.      But   the         Executive  Committee may, if it so decides         by  a  majority  of  three-fourth  of  its         members  present  in  the meeting delegate         any  of  its  powers  to  a  Sub-Committee         consisting of one or more of its members.

       69.    Servants   of   the   Board,  their         appointment and punishment.- The Executive         Committee of the Board  may  appoint  such         servants  as  it  may deem to be necessary         for the due performance by itself  of  its         duties,   and   may   from  time  to  time         determine the number, designations, grades         and   scales   of   salary,    or    other         remuneration  of such servants, and may at         any time fine, reduce, suspend  or  remove         any servant.

       123.  Power of Board to make by laws:- (1)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

       The  Board  may in general meeting make by         -laws, not  inconsistent  with  this  Act,         regulating  its procedure, and the fees to         be  levied   under   the   provisions   of         sub-section  (8)  of section 137, provided         that the  Board  shall  not,  without  the         previous  section of the State Government,         make any by-law--

       (a)  Prescribing  the  form  in  which the         budgets of the  Board  and  of  committees         shall be presented;

       (b)  providing   for   the   custody   and         investment  of  the funds of the Board and         prescribing   the   procedure   by   which         sanction  of  the Board may be accorded to         the deposits of surplus funds in specified         banks;

       (c)  Prescribing  the   qualification   of         candidates for membership of the Board and         committees;

       and   provided   further  that  no  by-law         falling within the purview of  clause  (c)         shall  impose  any disqualification upon a         Sikh only because he is a Sahjdhari Sikh.

       (2)  All by-laws framed under this section         shall have force of law.

       142.   Right  of  interested   person   to         complain   to  commission  in  respect  of         Misfeasance etc.     (1)   Notwithstanding         anything any thing contained in Section 92         of  the  Code of Civil procedure, 1908, or         in the Specific Relief Act, 1877,  any  of         the  person having interest, in a Notified         Sikh Gurdwara may, without joining any  of         the other persons interested therein, make         an  application to the Commission, against         the Board, the Executive Committee of  the         Board,  or  the  Committee  or against any         member or past member of the Board, of the         Executive Committee or of the Committee or         against   any   office-holder   or    past         officeholder  of  the  Gurdwara or against         any employee past or present of the  Board         or  Gurdwara  in  respect  of  any alleged         malfeasance, misfeasance, breach of trust;         neglect of duty, abuse of powers conferred         by this Act or any alleged expenditure  on         a  purpose  not authorised by this Act and         the  Commission  if  it  funds  any   such         malfeasance,  misfeasance, breach of trust         neglect  of  duty,  abuse  of  powers   or         expenditure  proved, may consistently with         the provisions of  this  Act  and  of  any         other  law  or  enactment in force for the         time being, direct any specified act to be         done  or  forborne  for  the  purpose   of         remedying  the  same and amy award damages         or costs against  the  person  responsible         for the same, and may order the removal of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

       any  office-holder  or member of the Board         Executive    Committee    or     Committee         responsible  for  the  same  and  may also         disqualify  any  member  of   the   Board,         Executive  Committee,  or  Committee, thus         removed from such membership for a  period         not  exceeding five years from the date of         such removal;

                       Provided that no such application         shall be entertained by the Commission, if         it is made more than six years  after  the         date of the act or omission from which the         right  to  make  an application under this         subsection accrues and, in the case of  an         application against a member of the Board,         the  Executive  Committee  of the Board or         the Committee, if it is  made  after  such         period  or  after six years of the date of         his ceasing to be a member,  whichever  is         later.

       (2)  The  Board   may   make   a   similar         application  to  the Commission which may,         in like manner, dispose of it.

       (3) The Board or any person  aggrieved  by         an  order  passed  by the Commission under         the  provisions  of  sub-section  (1)   or         sub-section (20 may, within ninety days of         the orders, appeal to the High Court."

       Executive   Committee   of  the  Board  in         exercise of its powers has framed  Service         Rules    for   the   employees   of   SGPC         prescribing their service conditions which         include their appointment and removal from         service.  Rules  4  and  5  provided   for         dismissal  and  termination of services of         the employees of the SGPC and they are  as         under :

       "4.  Dismissal-  (a)  The  employee can be         dismissed in  accordance  with  the  below         mentioned   rule   by   this   appointment         authority,   but   appeal   against    the         dismissal  by  the  president shall lie to         the Executive  Committee  within  30  days         from the date of dismissal.

       (b)   Any   employee   under   control  of         Management of any Department  of  Gurdwara         Under    Shiromani   Gurdwara   Prabandhak         Committee may prefer an appeal against any         punishment of suspension, dismissal, fine,         warning etc, within 30 days from the  date         of issuance of the order :-

       (i)   any   employee   of   the  Shiromani         Committee can be dismissed or degraded for         his bad character, dishonesty, drinking or         becoming  a  "patit"  but  before  he   is         dismissed  or degraded, the allegations in         the form of written charge sheet shall  be         supplied  to  him along with the statement

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

       of allegations, on the basis of which  the         charges    are   levelled   against   him.         Representation against these charges shall         be  received  from  the  employee   within         reasonable  time  and  in  case  he denied         these charges shall be got  inquired  into         in  the  presence  of the employee and for         each item of the charge sheer,  which  has         not   been  admitted,  evidence  shall  be         recorded in his presence and the  employee         shall  be  entitled  to  cross examination         these witnesses.    In  case  an  employee         shall  be  entitled  to  cross examination         these witnesses.  In case if the inquiring         Committee feels that certain  evidence  is         not  necessary,  it shall not be permitted         to be  produced  for  the  reasons  to  be         recorded in  writing.    Action  shall  be         taken against the employees only when  the         charge is established.

       (ii) In case the employees wish to produce         any record or document in  their  defence,         he  shall  be permitted to do so end if he         asks for the copies  of  these  documents,         the  same shall be supplied to him without         any objection and he shall be permitted to         inspect the record free of cost.

       (iii)  Every  employee,   who   has   been         dismissed  or degraded or removed shall be         supplied with the copies of the report  of         inquiry  committee and also final decision         of the Executive Committee free of cost.

       (iv)(a)   The  record  pertaining  to  the         dismissal or degradation  of  an  employee         shall  not  be  destroyed for three years,         rather it shall be kept in safe custody.

       (b)   If  an  employee  is  reinstated  on         exoneration after his suspension he  shall         be  entitled  to  the arrears of salary of         the suspension period.

       5.  Termination  :-  In case the Shiromani         Committee at any time terminates permanent         employee,   the   Committee    shall    be         responsible  to  give  him a notice of one         month or the salary for  one  month  along         with  the  admissible  allowances.  In the         same way, in case an  employee  wishes  to         leave  his service, he shall give a notice         of one month to the Committee or shall pay         one   months   salary   along   with   the         admissible allowance."

       In the case  of  Ajaib  Singh  vs.    The  Shiromani Gurdwara   Prabhandhak   Committee   the   services  of  the petitioner, who was working  as  Assistant  Manager  in  the service  of  the  respondent, were terminated by order dated May 2, 1996.  There were  certain  allegations  against  the petitioner  that he was responsible for the disappearance of the wife of an employee of the  respondent.    Certain  news

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

items also  appeared  in  local newspapers of Amritsar.  The Executive Committee of  the  respondent  thereupon  made  an inquiry.  Certain statements were said to have been recorded during  the  course of inquiry and thereafter the petitioner was served with the termination order.   He  was  given  one month’s salary  in  lieu of notice.  He challenged his order of termination by filing writ petition in  the  High  Court. He  pleaded  that  no  show-cause notice or charge-sheet was served upon him and Rule 4 of Service Rules was violated and that by not given an opportunity of being  heard  principles of   natural  justice  were  violated  inasmuch  as  he  was condemned without being heard.  Respondent raised objections that the writ petition was not maintainable as  it  was  not amenable  to  the  writ  jurisdiction of the High Court even though it was created under statute and that petitioner  did not   avail   alternative   remedy   against  his  order  of termination as provided under Section 142 of the Act.   High Court  referred  to the provisions of Section 42, 43, 64, 69 and 142 of the Act and also to Rules 4 and 5 of the  Service Rules.   It also referred to certain decisions of this court showing that writ would lie against the  respondent.    High Court,  however,  said  that  controversy  before it was not whether respondent was an instrumentality or even an  agency of  the  State or whether it was the creation of the statute and that the real controversy  was  whether  service  of  an employee  could  be  terminated  in  violation  of the rules framed by the respondent which rules had been  framed  under an authority  conferred  by  the Act.  It held that petition filed under Articles 226 and 227  of  the  constitution  was maintainable.  As to alternative remedy under Section 142 of the Act, High Court said as under :-

               "Section 142 of  the  Act,  on  a        plain  reading,  does  not  appear  to  be        relevant for the purposes of  the  present        controversy.   It  confers  a  right  on a        person who has any interest in a  notifies        Sikh  Gurdwara  to  make an application to        the Commission  of  the   Board.      This        application  may  be  in  respect  of  any        alleged  malfeasance,  breach  of   trust,        neglect  of  duty,  abuse of powers or any        alleged  expenditure  on  a  purpose   not        authorized by   the   Act.    On  such  an        application,  the   Judicial   Commission,        constituted  under  the Act, may look into        the matter and order the  removal  of  any        office  holder  or  member of the Board or        the Executive  Committee  responsible  for        the Act.    It  may  also  disqualify  any        member  of  the  Board  or  the  Executive        Committee.   It is thus clear that section        142 does not deal with  the  right  of  an        employee  in  respect  of filing an appeal        against  an  order   of   termination   or        dismissal.    The   plea   raised  by  the        respondent that an alternative  remedy  is        available under Section 142 of the Act has        no force and is rejected."

       A  mere reading of various provisions of the Act and Rules set  out  above  unmistakably  show  that  SGPC  is  a creation  of  the  statute  and  Service  Rules framed by it

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8  

exercise of its statutory power have  force  of  law.    Any violation  of  the  provision  of the Act and the Rules will certainly make SGPC amenable to  writ  jurisdiction  of  the High Court under Article 226 of the constitution.  We do not find  any  basis for the SGPC to contend that no writ can be issued against it even if its  action  is  contrary  to  the provision of law and the Rules framed thereunder.  SGPC is a creation of  the  statute.    It  has to act within the four corners of the law constituting it and the rules  framed  by it under  the powers conferred upon it under the Act.  We do not think any discussion is needed to dispel  this  argument by  the SGPC that it is immune from the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.  Language of Article 226 does not  admit  of any  limitation  on  the  powers  of  the High Court for the exercise of its jurisdiction thereunder.  Subba Rao, J.   in Dwarkanath vs.   ITO 1965 (3) SCR 536) said that Article 226 "is couched in comprehensive phraseology  and  it  ex  facie confers  a  wide  power on the High Court to reach injustice wherever it is found.  The Constitution  designedly  used  a wide  language  in  describing  the nature of the power, the purpose for which and the person or authority against who it can be exercised."

       We have  examined the provisions of Section 142.  It does not provide any alternative remedy to  an  employee  of the SGPC, who has been dismissed or whose services have been terminated.   Section  142  does  not cover any such type of case.  In our view High Court in Ajaib  Singh  case  rightly held  that  Section  142  of the Act was inapplicable in the case and that petitioner therein could not seek remedy under Section 142, which does not provide any alternative remedy.

       In  the impugned judgment we find that unfortunately High Court side tracked the issues raised  before  it  which were  fully  covered  by its earlier decision in Ajaib Singh case.  High Court in Ajaib Singh case had said that writ did lie against SGPC in case where its employee was dismissed in violation of the service rules and further that Section  142 did not  provide  any  alternative remedy.  In spite of this clear statement of law laid by the earlier Bench High  Court dismissed  the  writ  petition  by the impugned judgment and asked  the  appellants  to  seek  alternative  remedy  under Section 142  of  the  Act.    High  Court,  in our view, was unnecessarily  swayed  by  irrelevant  consideration   while interpreting statutory provisions.  Impugned judgment of the High  Court,  therefore, does not stand any further scrutiny and is liable to be set aside.

       We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment dated April 18, 1998 of the High Court and allow the writ petition filed by the appellants in the High Court.   Orders  of  the SGPC dismissing  the  appellants  are set aside.  They shall stand reinstated with all consequential benefits.

       The appeal is allowed with costs.