Supreme Court upholds Haryana Sikh Gurdwara (Management) Act

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, September 20

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the validity of the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara (Management) Act, 2014, under which a separate committee was formed to manage the affairs of gurdwaras in the state.

Not violative of Articles 25, 26

Since the affairs of the Sikh minority in the state are to be managed by the Sikhs alone, the Act cannot be said to be violative of any of the fundamental rights conferred under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Bench

“Since the affairs of the Sikh minority in the state are to be managed by the Sikhs alone, it cannot be said to be violative of any of the fundamental rights conferred under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution,” said a Bench led by Justice Hemant Gupta, dismissing two petitions filed eight years ago seeking quashing of the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara Act, 2014.

The Bench, which also included Justice Vikram Nath, noted that the Haryana Act was similar to the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, having similar provisions of constituting a committee to manage gurdwara affairs under Section 3 of the Haryana Act. “The gurdwara property in terms of Section 2(f) of the Haryana Act means all movable and immovable properties of a gurdwara or any institution which, immediately before the appointed day, vested or was kept in deposit in the name of any board, trust, committee, gurdwara management or was being regulated under the provisions of the 1925 Act. The members of the committee have to be elected from the eligible voters who are Amritdhari Sikh… The co-option is from the members of the community alone,” the Bench said.

“The 2014 Act also provides for the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara Judicial Commission in the same manner as is provided under the 1925 Act. The affairs of the gurdwara are again required to be managed by the local gurdwara committee,” it pointed out. There were two petitions against the Haryana Act – first by Harbhajan Singh – an elected SGPC representative from Kurukshetra and the second one by the SGPC.

The petitioners contended that under Section 72 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, the power to make laws in respect of the SGPC as an inter-state body corporate had been reserved with the Central Government only and there was no provision in law for any bifurcation by enacting a state legislation.

Terming it a hasty enactment, the petitioners had submitted that it’s not only against the provisions of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, but was also divisive in its intention to create dissension among the followers of the Sikh religion.

The Centre had contended that only Parliament had the exclusive power to enact law on the subject. “There is no justification for the Haryana State Legislature to have passed a law on the same subject matter, taking away the jurisdiction of the board constituted under the 1925 Act.”The top court, however, dismissed the petitions, saying the Haryana Assembly had the legislative competence to enact the law in question.

“The SGPC became inter-state body corporate not because of Entry 44 List I (Union List under Seventh Schedule) but because of reorganisation of the territories of the erstwhile state of Punjab. Therefore, Entry 44 would have no applicability in respect of legislative competence of the state of Haryana to enact the Haryana Act,” the top court said.

Holding that incorporation of a statutory body fell in Entry 32 of List II (State List under Seventh Schedule), as also unincorporated religious and other societies,” the top court concluded that the Haryana Act was within the legislative competence of the state.