When Law Requires A Particular Thing To Be Done In A Particular Manner, It Has To Be Done In That Manner Alone Or Not At All: Supreme Court

The Appeals before the Apex Court was filed by the Appellant who is managing the affairs of the appellant-temple known as Shri Khereshwar Mahadev Va Dauji Maharaj Samiti, Aligarh. The appeals challenged the order passed by the Allahabad High Court.

The Division Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih asserted, “...it is a settled law that when a law requires a particular thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that manner alone or not at all. When a legal proceeding to be filed by the Gram Sabha is to be filed only on the resolution of the Gram Sabha, the petition at the instance of Respondent No.5/Manju Devi, without there being a resolution of the Gram Sabha was not tenable at the instance of the Gram Sabha.”

Senior Advocate Gagan Gupta represented the Petitioner while Advocate Atul Parmar represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

There was a dispute with regard to the management of the temple with various committees urging for control. With regard to the said dispute, an Original Suit was pending before the Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aligarh. In the said suit, an application for temporary injunction was filed by the appellant and the same was rejected. The Appellant’s appeal before the Additional District Judge, Aligarh was allowed. The Respondent No.5/Manju Devi the Pradhan of Gram Sabha, Hardaspur had filed an application before the District Magistrate for implementation of the order by which the temple was directed to be given in favour of the Gaon Sabha, Hardaspur.

A writ petition came to be filed by Respondent No.5/Manju Devi when the District Magistrate did not proceed further and a direction was passed directing that the possession of the temple premises be handed over to the respondents. Since it was the contention of the appellant that the said order was passed without giving an opportunity for a hearing, the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition which was dismissed. His recall application too was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant approached the Apex Court.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the impugned order, the Bench noticed that though it was specifically submitted on behalf of the appellant herein before the High Court that an interim injunction order had been passed by the competent Court in a suit which was pending, the Court cursorily observed that the submission did not appeal to logic because two suits by one committee would clearly not lie. “In these circumstances, the least that was expected of the Division Bench of the High Court was a reference to the order passed by the Additional District Judge”, the Bench said.

The Apex Court found the approach of the High Court to be untenable. When the appellant had specifically brought to the notice of the High Court, the order passed by the competent civil court in its appellate jurisdiction and also the report of the Tehsildar/SDM regarding non-exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C given the pendency of the civil suit between the parties, the least that was expected of the High Court was to refer to it.

Noting that the petition at the instance of Respondent No.5/Manju Devi, without there being a resolution of the Gram Sabha was not tenable at the instance of the Gram Sabha, the Bench allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned orders.

Ordering status quo to be maintained till the decision of the civil suit, the Bench ordered, “In pursuance to the directions issued by the learned Additional District Judge vide order dated 6th April, 2019, we direct the learned Addl. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aligarh to dispose of Original Suit No.623 of 2012 as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of six months from today.”

“We further direct the appellant herein to implead the Gram Sabha as party defendant in the said suit so that all questions between all the parties can be decided by the Civil Court in an effective manner”, it concluded.

Cause Title: Shri Khereshwar Mahadev Va Dauji Maharaj Samiti, Aligarh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 362)

Appearance:

Appellant: Senior Advocate Gagan Gupta, Advocates Susheel Tomar, Harshita Verma, AOR Sanjeev Malhotra

Respondent: Advocate Atul Parmar, AOR Anjani Kumar Mishra, Advocates Abhishek Parmar, Praveen Mishra, Chandan Kumar Singh, Maneesh Pathak, Divyesh Pratap Singh, AOR Shashank Shekhar Singh, Advocate Abhinav Singh

Click here to read/download Judgment