High Court
Legal Reasoning
925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCIVIL APPLICATION NO.5846 OF 2023INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.98 OF 2021Shri Saibaba Sansthan Shirdi, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar,through its I/c. Chief Executive OfficerRahul s/o Dashrath Jadhav … APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtrathrough its Principal Secretary Law and Judiciary Department Mantralaya, Mumbai … RESPONDENTSWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO.5824 OF 2024INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.98 OF 20211.Kacheshwar Kisanrao Choudhari2.Arjun Raoji Choudhari3.Sandeep Walmik Gonde…APPLICANTSVERSUS1.The State of Maharashtrathrough the Secretary forLaw and Judiciary Department Mantralaya, Mumbai2.Shri Saibaba Sansthan Shirdi, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar,through its Chief Executive Officer…RESPONDENTSWITH1/16
Legal Reasoning
925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtCIVIL APPLICATION NO.8752 OF 2024INCIVIL APPLICATION NO.5846 OF 2023INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.98 OF 2021Ashutosh Pawankumar Tiwari…APPLICANTVERSUS1.The Chief Executive Officer,Shree Sai Baba SansthanTrust (Shirdi),Shri Sai Sansthan Campus,Shirdi, Tal: Rahata Dist. Ahmednagar2.Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke (Died)…RESPONDENTSWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO.10725 OF 2024INCIVIL APPLICATION NO.5846 OF 2023INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.98 OF 2021Rajendra Madanlal Pipada…APPLICANTVERSUS1.The State of Maharashtrathrough the Secretary,Law and Judiciary Department Mantralaya, Mumbai2.Shri Saibaba Sansthan, Shirdi, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar,through its Chief Executive OfficerRahul s/o Dashrath Jadhav …RESPONDENTS…Advocate for applicant in CA/5846/2023 : Mr. Anil S. BajajAdvocate for applicant in CA/5824/2024 : Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior advocate i/b. Mr. Ashwin HonAdvocate for applicant in CA/8752/2024 : Ms. P.S. Talekar i/b. M/s Talekar and Associates Advocate for Applicant in CA/10725/2024: Mr. Amol Sawant GP for respondent – State : Mr. A.B. Girase…2/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odt CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.Reserved on : 18.10.2024Pronounced on : 14.11.2024 ORDER (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :Civil Application No.5846/2023 has been filed by ShriSaibaba Sansthan Trust Shirdi through its Chief Executive Officer seekingpermission of this Court to implement resolution No.277 dated12.04.2023 of its ad hoc committee constituted pursuant to the interimarrangement devised for managing the affairs of this renowned trust,which is headed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,Ahilyanagar as an ex officio chairman, of which the District Collector,Ahilyanagar is one of the members, constituted pursuant to the finalorder passed in the PIL, till the State Government constitutes Shree SaiBaba Sansthan Management Committee in accordance with the provisionof Section 5 of the Shree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi) Act, 2004.2.Mr. Bajaj for the applicant - Sansthan would submit that thead hoc committee in its meeting dated 12.04.2023 by way of ResolutionNo.277 has decided to evolve the modalities for resuming offering offlowers to the deity. He would submit that the decision has not beentaken abruptly or arbitrarily but after considering the report submitted bya committee headed by the District Collector which was constituted forconsidering all the pros and cons of resumption of the practice which was3/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtstopped because of enormous complaints by various stakeholdersincluding the devotees who were being extorted for buying the flowers atan exorbitant rate. Several miscreants had entered into the business andeven offences were registered. In the wake of pandemic, the practice ofoffering flowers was stopped. There was an agitation for resuming thepractice and after due deliberation and objective scrutiny from differentangles, the modalities were worked out in the form of detail suggestion ofthe committee headed by the District Collector and its implementation isnow being sought by passing Resolution No.277.3.Mr. Bajaj would submit that it has been decided that theflowers would be purchased by a credit co-operative society being run bythe employees of the Sansthan directly from the farmers and whichwould be sold through it in the premises of the temple at a reasonablerate.4.Learned Senior advocate Mr. Hon for the applicants in CivilApplication No.5824/2024 would submit that the applicants are thefarmers. Offering of the flowers to the deity is considered ritual across thecountry. The practice was stopped only in respect of the sansthan duringCovid-2019. It has not been resumed till date and considering thewelfare of the farmers undertaking production of flowers, and thereligious beliefs of the devotees, permission may be granted to implementResolution No.277.5.Mr. Sawant, learned advocate who appears for the applicant4/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtin Civil Application No.10725/2024 also supports the request and seekspermission for implementation of Resolution No.277.6.Ms. Talekar who represents the applicants in CivilApplication No.8752/2024 submits that the applicant is a devotee of LordSai Baba and frequently visits Shirdi for offering prayers. However, he isa victim of a loot by the street vendor who forced him to buyflowers/garlands by taking huge money. He is victim of the extortion.The devotees were required to buy flowers at an exorbitant rate. Thiswas noticed even by the then board which was in the office in the year2017. It was resolved by Resolution No.705 dated 20.08.2017 to stop thepractice of offering flowers for the specific reason of harassment by thevendors and even physical harm to the devotees, the potential of thepremises getting unclean and the requirement of undertaking frequentcleaning up.7.She would submit that subsequently by Resolution no.851dated 23.10.2017 it was decided that the flowers and garlands carried bythe devotees would not be allowed inside the temple premises and wouldbe collected at the entry point itself. It was also decided by ResolutionNo.325 dated 21.05.2022 to display the board that the flowers/garlandsetc. would not be allowed to be offered. She would submit that it is notthat the practice of offering flowers was stopped due to Covid lock-downas is being sought to be demonstrated. She would fairly submit that theapplicant does not intend to offend the religious beliefs of the devotees5/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtbut the reasons leading to the stoppage of the practice still persist andgranting permission to resume the practice would again lead toharassment and extortion of the devotees. 8.She would further advert our attention to the various newsitems/paper cuttings to substantiate her stand as to how criminalactivities around the temple premises are rising and how the devotees arebeing extorted and harassed.9.We have considered the rival submissions and perused thepapers.10.At the out set, it is necessary to note that the previousdivision bench in the order dated 14.07.2023 had made followingobservations:“1. After a brief hearing on this application and considering thatoffering of flowers, breaking of coconuts etc., has beenstopped in view of the Covid restrictions that were introducedduring the Covid pandemic lock-down and the SOP andkeeping in view that the temple premises and theshrine(Sanctum-Sanctorum) is now extremely clean, tidy anddoes not stink of de-composed flowers or coconut water, wehave formed a prima-facie view that it would not beappropriate to reintroduce the offering of flowers inside thetemple.2. The learned Advocate for the trust submits that he wouldaddress the Court on this application after two weeks bytaking appropriate instructions.3. Stand over to 28.07.2023 in the urgent orders category.”11.The previous division bench passed another order on21.06.2024 which reads as under : “ 1. On 14.07.2023, we had passed an order in Civil Application6/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtNo. 5846 of 2023, which reads as under:-“1. After a brief hearing on this application andconsidering that offering of flowers, breaking ofcoconuts etc., has been stopped in view of the Covidrestrictions that were introduced during the Covidpandemic lock-down and the SOP and keeping in viewthat the temple premises and the shrine(Sanctum-Sanctorum) is now extremely clean, tidy and does notstink of de-composed flowers or coconut water, wehave formed a prima-facie view that it would not beappropriate to reintroduce the offering of flowersinside the temple. 2.The learned Advocate for the trust submits thathe would address the Court on this application aftertwo weeks by taking appropriate instructions.3. Stand over to 28.07.2023 in the urgent orderscategory.”2. The second Civil Application is preferred by such agriculturistswho indulge in flower farming. They pray that the resolutionpassed by the Sansthan, bearing No.277, dated 12.04.2023, forpermitting the devotees to offer flowers to Lord Saibaba, beimplemented. However, they are unconcerned with the part of theresolution permitting the purchase of flowers from the farmersand to be sold only through the credit society of the employees ofthe Sansthan.3. There is no dispute that the offering of the flowers in any templecreates a large quantity of accumulation of such offerings. Theseflowers get decomposed within a short time after being plucked. Amechanism has to be provided for ensuring that these offeringsare processed in a way which would not disturb the ecologicalbalance and would not create dirt or scattering in the shrine oroutside.4. The learned Senior Advocate Shri Hon appearing on behalf of theApplicants in the second Application, submits on instructions thatsuch flowers and offerings are processed and are converted intoessence sticks (Agarbatti), which is a product, which is also soldin Shirdi.5. In view of the above, we would expect the Sansthan to file anadditional affidavit to bring on record any process that they havedevised or which is enforced for processing such flowers, as thiswould guarantee not only clearing of the offerings at regularintervals, but more importantly, the shrine is kept clean and tidy.Let such additional affidavit be filed, on or before 04.07.2024.7/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odt6. List these Civil Applications in the ‘urgent orders’ category on12.07.2024.”12.The latest order dated 20.07.2024 that was passed by theprevious division bench reads as under :“1.We have considered the submission of the learned Advocate ShriBajaj on behalf of the Shree Saibaba Sansthan, Mr. Hon, the learnedSenior Advocate for the applicants in Civil Application No.5824 of2024 and Ms. Talekar, the learned Advocate for the PIL Petitioner. 2.The learned Advocate Ms. Talekar has tendered a scanned copy of aCivil Application seeking intervention (34 pages). She submits thatthe original Civil Application would be received by her since theapplicant is from Bhatinda, State of Punjab and the Civil Applicationis in transit.3.Leave granted to the Applicants to add prayer in Civil ApplicationNo. 5824 of 2024, for seeking intervention in the PIL to the extent ofthe prayers made in the Civil Application. Addition be carried outforthwith. Let affidavit in reply be filed in this Civil Application. 4.Considering that a scanned copy of the Civil Application has beentendered across the Bar by the learned Advocate Ms. Talekar, thenon-applicants are at liberty to tender their affidavits in reply sinceshe has made a statement that the original civil application would befiled in this Court prior to the next date of hearing.5.The issue before us, as is set out by the Sansthan as well as theapplicants in Civil Application No.5824 of 2024, is as regardsgranting permission to the devotees to offer garlands/flowers andsweets (Prasad) at the Shree Saibaba Sansthan Shrine. The Sansthaninforms us that earlier, prior to Covid lock down, the Sansthan hadreceived an application from Janseva Foundation. On a query raisedby the intervention Applicant, it is informed that Smt. ShalinitaiVikhePatil is the Chairperson of that Janseva Foundation. It issituated at Pravaranagar and it has a manufacturing unit formanufacturing of Agarbatti. Since an application was received fromthe said Foundation for purchasing the flowers, the application wasaccepted by the Governing Body and the permission was granted tothe said Foundation to take flowers for converting them intoAgarbatti. 10% from the sale proceeds of the Agarbatti, were offeredto the Sansthan and the Governing Council has accepted the saidoffer. Now, Mr. Bajaj informs us that there would be an auction ofthe flowers, if this Court permits the devotees to offer flowers at theShrine.8/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odt6.We called upon the learned Advocate Mr. Bajaj to inform the Courtas to what is the scheme that is in the mind of the Committee.According to him, the flowers would be auctioned and the bestbidder, who manufacturers Agarbatti, will donate a particularpercentage of the total Agarbatti manufactured, to the Sansthan.When we called upon him to elucidate further, he submits that theTrust /Sansthan has not yet prepared a policy as to whether themanufacturing unit of the bidder could available at any place inIndia or whether it should be a localized manufacturing unit orwhether the Sansthan can monitor the quantity of Agarbattimanufactured in order to assess the sale proceeds. 7.At this prima facie stage, we are of the view that the Trust shouldconcentrate on disposal of the flowers by auction (tender) method,rather than trying to have any involvement in the conversion of suchflowers through a manufacturing process, into perfume or scent orAgarbatti. Prima facie, we are of the view that the Trust has noreason to enter into these activities or venture into the conversion offlowers into some finished product. The Sansthan should beconcerned with the flowers that are being offered at the Shrine andsuch flowers should then be handed over to the highest bidder,provided this Court permits the offering of flowers at the Shrine.8.Prior to the commencement of the hearing that has occurred today,the learned Advocate on behalf of the proposed interventionapplicants, has raised certain grounds. We would consider thesegrounds only after the intervention application is filed. In themeanwhile, we deem it appropriate to direct the Registry of thisCourt, through the Registrar (Judicial), to call upon the followingentities to submit their reports as regards, whether offering in thenature of flowers and garlands is permitted in the saidTemples/Shrines :-a. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh. b. Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri, Orissa c. Shree Kashi Vishwanath Temple, Uttarkashi, Varanasi, U.P.d. Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, Thiruvananthapuram, Keralae. Shree Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Katra, J & K f. Khwaja Gharib Nawaz Dargah Sharif Shrine, Ajmer, Rajasthan g. Golden Temple, Amritsar, Punjab h. Vitthal Rukmini Mandir Sansthan, Pandharpur, Maharashtra i. Shree Tulja Bhavani Temple, Tuljapur, Maharashtraj. Mahalaxmi Temple, Kolhapur, Maharashtra k. Shree Siddhivinayak Ganapati Mandir Trust-Mumbai l. Shree Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan, Shegaon, Maharashtra m. Mahaganpati Temple, Ranjangaon, Maharashtran. Shreemant Dagdusheth Halwai Ganpati, Pune If yes, what is the mode adopted for the disposal of such9/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtofferings and what is the methodology used for ensuring that suchofferings are auctioned and the same are lifted from thetemple/shrines immediately, so as to avoid the litter. We call uponthe learned Registrar (Judicial) to request these Shrines/TempleTrusts to submit their reports at the earliest, preferably within aperiod of 21 days from the date of receipt of the communicationfrom the Registrar (Judicial) of this court. Let such reports bedelivered to the office of the Registrar (Judicial) through it's emailaddress. 9. Stand over to 23rd August, 2024 in the urgent orders category.”13.Pursuant to such observations, the Registry seems to havereceived responses from some of the aforementioned religious trustnamely, Shree Siddhivinayak Ganapati Mandir Trust-Mumbai, ShreeMata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Katra, J & K, Shree Gajanan MaharajSansthan, Shegaon, Maharashtra, Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri, Orissa,Vitthal Rukmini Mandir Sansthan, Pandharpur, Maharashtra andShreemant Dagdusheth Halwai Ganpati, Pune.14.Similarly, a detailed report of the Committee constitutedunder the Chairmanship of Collector, Ahilyanagar for controlling theflower vendors around the sansthan/temple has been annexed to theapplication. Additional affidavit has also been filed by the applicant -Sansthan pursuant to the directions contained in the order dated21.06.2024.15.It is necessary to observe at the inception that the applicant -Sansthan which is a trust is regulated by a special statute namely theShree Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi) Act, 2004 (the Act). Itcontemplates affairs of the Trust to be managed by a board constituted10/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtunder Section 5 of the Act. The composition of the board was underchallenge in the PIL No.98/2021. By the judgment and order dated13.09.2022 appointment of the members of the Managing Committeeexcept two, was quashed and set aside. The State Government wasdirected to constitute new managing committee within eight weeks inaccordance with the provisions of Section 5 of the Act. Till the time a newmanaging committee was constituted the affairs of the trust weredirected to be supervised, monitored and looked after by a three membercommittee comprising of the Principal District Judge, Ahilyanagar, theCollector, Ahilyanagar and the Chief Executive Officer of theSansthan/Trust, the Principal District Judge being the Chairman. It wasalso directed that such ad hoc committee should not take any majorfinancial decision in respect of management of the affairs of the Sansthanwithout permission of this Court. Though this order is under challengebefore the Supreme Court in SLP No.16460/2022, the aforementionedarrangement continues. 16.We are giving the brief history to demonstrate that this Courthas a limited role in monitoring working of the ad hoc committee.Essentially, it is the ad hoc committee which is supposed to take thedecision for managing the affairs of the trust and if it is resulting inundertaking any major financial decision that, to this limited extent, apermission of this Court is required. This Court cannot run themanagement under the guise of granting permission to the decisions11/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtbeing taken by the ad hoc committee. Being alive to such a state ofaffairs, having a limited role, the request of the ad hoc committee toimplement Resolution No.277 has to be considered, whereby, it hasresolved as under : "नि(cid:2)र्ण(cid:4)य क. २७७तत्काली(cid:2)नि(cid:14)ल्हानि(cid:17)कारीयांचेअध्यक्षतेखालीलसनि(cid:27)ती(cid:2)ेसादरकेलेल्या अहवालातसंस्था(cid:2)क(cid:27)(cid:4)चा- यांच्यापतसंस्थे(cid:27)ार्फ(cid:4)तशेतक- यांकडू(cid:2)र्फुलांचीखरेदीकरु(cid:2)(cid:27)ंनिदराचे प्रांगर्णातभानिवकां(cid:2)ारास्तदरातउपलब्(cid:17)करु(cid:2)देतायेईलअशीनिशर्फारसकेलेलीआहे. त्या(cid:2)ुसार(cid:27)ुख्य काय(cid:4)कारीअनि(cid:17)कारीयां(cid:2)ी(cid:27)ंनिदरसुरक्षानिवषयकसव(cid:4)बाबींचानिवचारकरु(cid:2)काय(cid:4)वाहीकरावीव(cid:27)ा. नि(cid:14)ल्हानि(cid:17)कारीयां(cid:2)ीत्यांचेअहवालातनिदलेल्यासव(cid:4)(cid:27)ुद्दयांचेकाटेकोरपर्णेपाल(cid:2)करावेअसानि(cid:2)र्ण(cid:4)य घेण्यातआला. दो(cid:2)तेती(cid:2)(cid:27)निहन्या(cid:2)ंतर(cid:27)ुख्यकाय(cid:4)कारीअनि(cid:17)कारीयां(cid:2)ीआढावाघेऊ(cid:2)अहवाल सनि(cid:27)तीस(cid:27)ोरसादरकरावा. (काय(cid:4)वाही- संरक्षर्णनिवभाग)” Roughly translated :- “The Committee under the chairmanshipof the then Collector in its report has recommended that flowerscan be purchased and made available by the Credit Co-operativeSociety of the Employees of the Sansthan within the premises ofthe temple at a reasonable rate. The Chief Executive Officerwould ensure implementation of the report of that Committeeby taking into consideration all the aspects and the securityarrangement of the temple.The Chief Executive Officer shall monitor the working fortwo/three months and to submit a report.”17.In the light of the observations in the order dated 20.07.2024Mr. Bajaj has informed that the ad hoc committee has still not preparedany policy as to the manner in which flowers offered are to be disposedof. However, in the additional affidavit filed by the administrative officerof the Sansthan expressed as to how, earlier, such flowers and garlandsoffered were being disposed of in the form of giving it away to a self helpgroup who was in to manufacturing of agarbatties by virtue of anagreement dated 10.10.2017 entered into between that foundation andthe Sansthan/Trust 10% of the sale of agarbatties was to be deposited12/16/ 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtwith the Sansthan and the arrangement was meant for three years. It hasalso been mentioned about a similar agreement having been entered intoin accordance with Resolution No.39 dated 30.01.2019. It has beenexpressly mentioned in paragraph Nos.7 to 9 in that additional affidavitas under : “7. I say that, in the event the Civil Application No. 5846 of 2023is allowed, E-Tender will be called for collection of the usedflowers and garlands offered by the devotees to the Deity forpreparation of Agarbatti or some other products which can beprepared from such used flowers and garlands.8.I say that, even otherwise the Applicant Sansthan through it'sHealth Department will be carrying out the adequatecleanliness which was earlier carried out by the manpower(labours), but the same will be carried out by the electricalmachinery etc.9.I say that as mentioned in the report of District Magistrate,Shirdi Municipality and Police Station Shirdi shouldcoordinate and ensure that no unauthorized flower sellingshops or other middlemen/agent will operate in Shirdi cityand no cheating of the saibhakt will be done in purchase offlowers and Garlands. In the Temple Premises this care will betaken through Chief Executive Officer of Shri SaibabaSansthan Trust.”18.We are essentially concerned with the aforementioned standof the applicant trust/sansthan. If such used flowers and garlands are tobe E-auctioned or disposed of by E-tender one wonders as to how therecould be a stipulation superadded precisely for their use in manufactureof agarbatties. Similarly, we wonder as to how intention or desire of theSansthan/trust expressed in paragraph No.1 expecting the DistrictMagistrate and Municipal Council as well as police to coordinate selling13/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtof the flowers by unauthorized vendors, middleman and agent wouldwork and as to how they would abate the criminal activities taking placeonce offering of flowers is resumed. We are only pointing out theseaforementioned facts to demonstrate that the apprehension beingexpressed by the intervenor represented by Ms. Talekar cannot be said tobe ill-founded and even the ad hoc committee seems to be quite alive tothe potential criminal elements entering into the field once the practice ofoffering flowers/garlands resumes. 19.Incidentally, the committee under the chairmanship of theDistrict Collector for controlling the affairs of the flower vendors aroundShree Sai Baba Sansthan Temple, copy of report by which is annexed tothe application moved by the Sansthan Civil Application No.5846/2024(Annexure - C-2) clearly demonstrates that the Hon’ble Minister ofRevenue, Animal Husbandry and Dairy Development had taken theinitiative in constituting the Committee in a meeting held with thecitizens of Shirdi and the Administrative Officer on 27.08.2022. It is withhis approval that the Committee had resolved and concluded that it is inthe interest of the farmers who were growing flowers over 384 hectares,the labourers and the businessman were dependent on and were affectedby stoppage of the practice of offering flowers. It was also noted thatauctions of flowers were not taking place in any of the marketcommittees in the vicinity of Shirdi namely, Kopargaon, Rahata andShrirampur and the market committee at Rahata could start auctioning of14/16 925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtflowers within its premises. The flowers could be made available by thefarmers directly through the Credit Co-operative Society of the Employeesof the trust/sanstha and can be made available to the devotees at areasonable rate within the premises of the devasthan trust by displayingthe rate card in and around the premises of the temple and it would bethe responsibility of the Municipal Council and the police to ensure thatno unauthorized flower vendors operate and there would be nomiddleman. It is pursuant to such resolution by the committeeconstituted by the Hon’ble Minister that the ad hoc committee seems tohave passed Resolution No.277. It does not seem to be a sheer coincidentthat in the orders dated 21.06.2024 and 20.07.2024 it was revealed, as issubmitted by Ms. Talekar, that the chairperson of that Janseva Foundationwho had entered into agreement with the Sansthan/trust for disposal ofthe flowers offered to the deity, is none other than the better-half of theHon’ble Minister who had taken the initiative and based on whoserecommendations the Committee has taken the decision and passedResolution No.277.20.Be that as it may, we are merely concerned with the decisionto resume practice of offering flowers. Having a limited role in the lightof aforementioned facts and circumstances, appropriateness or otherwiseof the decision should not influence our decision more so when theresolution merely seeks to resume the practice apparently with a riderthat the flowers would be purchased by the credit co-operative society of15/16
Decision
925.CA.5846.23 in PIL.98.21.odtthe employees of Santhan/trust and would be made available to thedevotees at a reasonable rate within the premises of the temple.21.This would not result in any financial implication, except inrespect of disposal of such flowers and garlands offered to the deity.Since nothing has been mentioned in the resolution as to the manner inwhich it would be disposed of and being a perishable one requiringregular and prompt disposal, it would be appropriate that permission isgranted to the Sansthan/trust for resuming offering of flowers/garlandsas resolved by Resolution No.277, and calling upon the ad hoc committeeto take appropriate decision at the earliest regarding the manner in whichit decides to dispose of the waste to be generated by virtue of offering ofthe flowers/garlands. 22.The Civil Application No.5846/2023 is allowed. Other civilapplications including the intervention application are disposed of. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ] JUDGE JUDGEhabeeb16/16