Writ Authority Cannot Be Invoked When Efficacious Remedy Exists Under Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act.

The petitioners filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to restrain private individuals (respondents 15 to 24) from allegedly grabbing land belonging to the Radha Krishna Dwarika Mandir, a trust registered with the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts.

The petitioners had previously filed CWJC No. 6453 of 2025 for similar reliefs, which was disposed of on 12.09.2025 with liberty to approach the "competent statutory authority".

Instead of approaching the statutory Tribunal, the petitioners submitted a representation to the District Magistrate, Patna, on 23.10.2025.

Upon receiving no response, they filed the current writ petition.

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition under Article 226 when a specific statutory remedy for recovery of trust property and removal of encroachment exists under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950.

2. Whether the District Magistrate is the competent authority to adjudicate disputes regarding the encroachment of religious trust properties under the 1950 Act.

The court primarily applied the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950.

Specifically, Section 43A provides the procedure for filing applications before a Tribunal for the recovery of alienated property or decision on property disputes.

Section 43D empowers the Tribunal to remove encroachments on trust property, defining "encroacher" and establishing the summary inquiry process.

Section 43E outlines the mode of eviction and implementation of Tribunal orders through police assistance, while explicitly barring Civil Courts from granting injunctions in respect of such proceedings.

The Court observed that the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, provides a comprehensive and exclusive statutory mechanism for dealing with trust property disputes.

The court noted that in the previous round of litigation (CWJC No. 6453 of 2025), the petitioners were specifically granted liberty to approach the appropriate authority.

However, the petitioners misdirected their grievance by filing a representation with the District Magistrate.

The Court reasoned that the District Magistrate lacks the statutory jurisdiction to adjudicate or entertain applications for the removal of encroachment under the Act; such power vests "exclusively with the Tribunal" constituted under the Act.

Consequently, the existence of an efficacious alternative statutory remedy renders the current writ petition premature and maintainable.

The Court declined to express an opinion on the merits and disposed of the writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the concerned Tribunal/authority in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, and the previous High Court order.