This issue has been dealt with by a Division Bench of
this Court in case titled Omkar Sharma and ors vs. Shri
Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board
and connected matters,
reported in 2005 (1) SLJ 260, wherein it was held that Shri
Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board has been constituted under
a statute and in absence of any control of the Government it
cannot be said to be “State” or an “authority” within the
meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It was
further held that writ petition for enforcement of fundamental
rights against the Shrine Board would not be maintainable.
The dictum of law is loud and clear that Shri Mata
Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, not being an instrumentality of
the State, is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this
Court. That being so, the instant writ petition is held to be not
maintainable and is, accordingly, dismissed.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
OWP No. 229/2011
Dated;03 .01.2015
Date of Decision:
Vikas Dhawan
v
State of J&K and ors.
Coram:
Bhat-
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bansi Lal Bhat-Judge
Citation;AIR 2015(NOC)739 J&K
Following reliefs have been claimed in the instant
petition.
“(a) to permit and ensure the use of only 100% Herbal
Kumkum/Sindoor made of traditional
and safe
ingredients for applying Tilak on the forehead of
devotees;
(b)
to sell Pooja Samagri containing 100% Herbal
Kumkum/Sindoor
made
of
traditional
and
safe
ingredients in all relevant shops under the control of
2
respondent No. 2 as an essential part of the Bhaint
items offered to Mata Vaishno Dev Ji;”
Petitioner, claiming to be a manufacturer of Herbal
products is aggrieved of use of unknown ingredients and
Synthetic Chemicals in the name of Kumkum and Sindoor
products in religious shrines and temples. The case set up by
the petitioner is that Kumkum and Sindoor used for applying
Tilak to devotees and sold as an essential part of Pooja
Samagri present in Bhaint items offered to Mata Vaishno
Devi Ji inside the Holy Shrine as well as other temples en-
route the holy shrine of Mata Vaishno Devi Ji are different
from the ones used in the Pindi-Poojan of Mata Vaishno
Devi Ji. It is alleged that Kumkum and Sindoor products
such as Ashtagandha Chandan, Kumkum Powder, Sindoor
Powder, Roli, Liquid Sindoor, Tilak, Tika, Pottu, Tilakam
etc. sold all over the country are made with the help of
unknown ingredients, synthetic
chemicals, Azo Dyes,
Industrial Dyes, Toxic and poisonous ingredients like Lead
Oxide/Crude Red Lead/ Mercury Sulphite/ Rhodamine B etc.
which can cause skin Cancer, Anemia, Kidney Disorders,
Growth Retardation, Learning Disabilities, Lack of Vision,
Hereditary disorders etc. Petitioner claims to have conducted
research to ascertain the ingredients used for manufacturing
of Kumkum and Sindoor as per Vedic scriptures and found
that herbal ingredients like Rakt-Chandan and Kesar were
traditionally used as Kumkum/Sindoor in the Pindi-Poojan
inside the holy shrine. However, the Kumkum and Sindoor
sold en-route the shrine of Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Ji was
manufactured from synthetic chemicals and industrial Dyes
etc. causing serious health hazards. Petitioner claims to have
undertaken
a
project
of
manufacturing
herbal
Kumkum/Sindoor from Rakt-Chandan (Lal Chandan) out of
a strong desire to do something good for the society.
However, he, did not obtain a patent on the novel product
manufacture, lest he is misunderstood to denounce the
spurious Kumkum/Sindoor for commercial gain. Respondent
No.
2
is
stated
to
have
permitted
the
sale
of
Kumkum/Sindoor (Lal Chandan Tilak) made by the
petitioner at its two Souvenir shops, but did not permit its
sale in the Bhaint shops. However, consequently, respondent
No. 2 stopped buying the Herbal Kumkum/Sindoor from
petitioner in February 2009 on the basis of some complaints.
4
Petitioner claims to have made number of representations
against rejection of his bids. It is alleged that respondent No.
2 did so under the influence of vested interests. It is alleged
that Pooja Samagri containing Kumkum/Sindoor was
removed from the list of Bhaint items in NIT dated
27.02.2010 under the false pretext of security concerns,
though Narel (coconut) was being accepted as Bhaint from
devotees before Darshans at the entry point of Shrine
premises.
Respondent No. 2 has filed objections.
The stand taken in the objections is that petitioner had
raised issues which are purely factual. Besides, petitioner is
claiming enforcement of contract/promotion of his business
through the medium of instant writ petition. It is pleaded that
the writ petition is not maintainable on both these counts. It is
further pleaded that no writ petition lies against Shri Mata
Vaishno Devi Shrine Board and official respondents 1 and 3
are neither necessary nor proper parties. It is pleaded that for
security arrangements the review committee had taken
several decisions relating to pilgrimage. One of the decisions
taken in the security meeting was with regard to carrying of
5
Sindoor to holy Shrine. The security review meeting dated
04.03.2010 decided that carriage of Sindoor to cave shall be
stopped forthwith for security reasons. It is pleaded that the
petitioner was trying to promote and serve his business
interest by seeking direction from this Court to allow the
selling of Sindoor being manufactured by him. It is further
pleaded that it is the only Herbal Sindoor Tilak which is
being applied on forehead of the pilgrims inside the Cave
Shrine and the Herbal Sindoor is being received on donation
basis from the donors. However, sale of Herbal Sindoor at
private shops in Shrine area is not banned.
Heard and considered.
From averments made in the petition, it is clearly borne
out that the petitioner wants to promote his products for
commercial gain notwithstanding the fact that he claims to be
concerned about use of Kumkum/Sindoor manufactured from
unknown ingredients, synthetic preparation etc. by the
devotees which frequent the market including the shops en-
route the holy shrine of Mata Vaishno Devi Ji. The concern
shown by the petitioner, though portrayed as a desire to
protect the devotees from health hazards emanating out of
use of non-herbal Kukkum/Sindoor, appears to be an attempt
on the part of the petitioner to gloss over the truth and
promote his commercial products claiming to be purely
herbal in nature. Petitioner has not been able to conceal the
factum of his being dropped from the list of suppliers on the
basis of complaints about impurities found in his products.
The averments made in the petition leave no room for doubt
that the petitioner wants to thrust his products, stated to be
based on purely herbal ingredients, on the Shrine Board
oblivious of the fact that the security concern and threat
perception assessed from time to time by the security review
committee found it hazardous to allow Kumkum/Sindoor at
the Bhaint shops though its sale in private shops was not
prohibited. Furthermore, in absence of scientific studies to
the contrary to pointing out that the use of non-herbal
Kumkum/Sindoor poses a health hazard, prohibition on use
of such products may not be warranted. The factual issue
raised cannot be decided by invoking writ jurisdiction of this
Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India.
From averments made in the petition and the nature of
relief claimed in the petition, it is manifestly clear that the
relief is sought against respondent No. 2-Shri Mata Vaishno
Devi Shrine Board. Inclusion of respondent No. 1-State and
respondent
No.
3-
Commissioner/Secretary
Health
Department of J&K Government is an unnecessary surplus
age in the petition and arraying of respondents 1 and 3 is
unwarranted. Once respondents 1 and 3 are struck out, as
being unnecessary and improperly impleaded respondents,
the
question
raised
by
respondent
No.2
regarding
maintainability of the petition would be the sole issue to be
dealt with.
This issue has been dealt with by a Division Bench of
this Court in case titled Omkar Sharma and ors vs. Shri
Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board
and connected matters,
reported in 2005 (1) SLJ 260, wherein it was held that Shri
Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board has been constituted under
a statute and in absence of any control of the Government it
cannot be said to be “State” or an “authority” within the
meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It was
further held that writ petition for enforcement of fundamental
rights against the Shrine Board would not be maintainable.
The dictum of law is loud and clear that Shri Mata
Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, not being an instrumentality of
the State, is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this
Court. That being so, the instant writ petition is held to be not
maintainable and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Bansi Lal Bhat)
Judge
Jammu
03.01.2015
Bir
No comments:
Post a Comment