TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 applies to the respondent institution as a charitable institution or endowment, and whether Sai mandirs are outside the Act; (ii) whether the question of applicability and character of the institution is a jurisdictional fact to be decided by the statutory authority, and whether the notice and proposed appointment of trustees could be interdicted without hearing.
Issue (i): Whether the A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 applies to the respondent institution as a charitable institution or endowment, and whether Sai mandirs are outside the Act.
Analysis: The Act was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to administration and governance of charitable and Hindu religious institutions and endowments. Its application is not confined to Hindu religious institutions alone, but extends separately to public charitable institutions and endowments as well as Hindu public religious institutions and endowments. The definitions of charitable endowment, charitable institution, and charitable purpose are broad and inclusive, and the exclusion in the definition of charitable purpose is limited to objects exclusively of a religious nature. The respondent had already been registered under the earlier enactment and continued to stand registered under the 1987 Act. The earlier view that Sai mandirs are outside the Act had not considered the full statutory scheme and exclusionary clause.
Conclusion: The Act applies to charitable institutions and endowments, and the earlier restrictive view excluding Sai mandirs from its ambit was held to be incorrect.
Issue (ii): Whether the question of applicability and character of the institution is a jurisdictional fact to be decided by the statutory authority, and whether the notice and proposed appointment of trustees could be interdicted without hearing.
Analysis: Section 87 confers power on the Deputy Commissioner to decide whether an institution or endowment is charitable or religious, and such a dispute involves a jurisdictional fact that ordinarily should be examined by the statutory authority as a preliminary issue. A show-cause notice or proposal cannot ordinarily be quashed at the threshold unless it is plainly without authority. However, the authority must comply with natural justice before taking a final decision, and a board of trustees cannot be appointed without affording an opportunity of hearing.
Conclusion: The statutory authority was entitled to proceed under the Act, but the proposed appointment could not be sustained without hearing the respondent first.
Final Conclusion: The writ appeal succeeded to the extent that the Act was held applicable and the writ petition could not be allowed on the assumption that Sai mandirs were outside the statute, but the respondents were protected by a requirement of prior hearing before any final appointment of trustees.
Ratio Decidendi: An inclusive endowments statute must be construed according to its text and purpose so as to give effect to both charitable and religious categories, and where the statute confers authority to determine the institution's character, that jurisdictional fact should ordinarily be decided by the statutory forum, subject to compliance with natural justice.
TaxTMI 
