Shekhar B. Saraf, J.:

1. I have heard the counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have perused the materials on record.

2. Firstly, I shall be dealing with interlocutory applications being G.A. No. 36 of 2023 and G.A. No. 37 of 2023 wherein a total of nine applicants claimed shebaiti rights by tracing out their interest through one Shri Prasannya Charan Chowdhury. The applicants in G.A. No. 36 of 2023 are Kasturi Roy, Kaberi Bhowmick, Karabi Chatterjee and Supriya Roy and the applicants in G.A. No. 37 of 2023 are Purnima Hazra, Subal Sakha Bishnu, Sayantani Bishnu, Arnab Bishnu and Prabir Haldar.

3. In 2007, the said applicants had applied for enlistment as shebaits which was considered and rejected by the then Chairman-cum-Special Officer, Dr. Tapas Banerjee. I have chalked out the relevant portions from minutes of the meeting dated February 02, 2007: -

“5. Regarding the application of Prabir Haldar along with the others it is objected to by some of the Sebaits on, inter alia, the ground that his predecessor, Late Saraju Prabha Mondal through whom the applicant is claiming Sebaitee right as her heir was not enrolled as a Sebait. It is stated in the application that she died on the 8 August, 1991. She never claimed to be a Sebait during her lifetime. The applicant is praying to be a Sebait for the first time. His right has to be established in an appropriate forum (sic) before he can be enrolled as a Sebait. Till the decision of such forums comes, he cannot be enrolled by me as a sebait for the first time in the proceeding before me, particularly when, strong objections are raised. The application therefore, is disallowed.

**

10. The application of Kaberi Bhowmick stands on the same footing as the 5th application and hence the same order.

11. The application of Supriya Roy stands on the same footing as the 5th application and hence the same order.

12. The application of Kasturi Roy stands on the same footing as the 5th application and hence the same order.

12A.The application of Karabi Chatterjee stands on the same footing as the 5th application and hence the same order.

**

24. The application of Anima Mondal (Polley), Purnima Hazra (Haldar), Prabir Haldar, Runu Haldar (Mukherjee) and Karabi Haldar (Bishnee) stands on the same footing as the 5th application and hence the same order. (emphasis supplied)

4. In 2015, the said applicants undertook another attempt to gain shebaiti rights by filing interlocutory application namely G.A. No. 3264 of 2015 in C.S. No. 308 of 1872. The said application was considered and rejected by Justice Soumen Sen by an order dated April 26, 2017. The relevant portion of the order is cited below: -

“The said report of the Special Officer (sic) was accepted by the Court. In 2013, when Mr. Ashok Kumar Banerjee was appointed as Chairman-cum-Special Officer, the petitioners did not make any representation before me. The petitioners also did not take any steps to establish their rights in appropriate forum.

Under such circumstances, this application, G.A. No. 3264 of 2015 is dismissed as misconceived.”

5. The present Chairman-cum-Special Officer observed in his Report dated June 02, 2022 that the aforesaid order pronounced by Justice Soumen Sen has reached its finality and cannot be reopened before the Chairman-cum-Special Officer.

6. At this juncture, it would be prudent on my part to refer to case laws which deal with the principle of res judicata. In Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorajin Deb reported in AIR 1960 SC 941, the apex court stated the following: -

“The principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving a finality to judicial decisions. What it says is that once a res is judicata, it shall not be adjudged again. Primarily it applies as between past litigation and future litigation. When a matter-whether on a question of fact or on a question of law-has been decided between two parties in one suit or proceeding and the decision is final, either because no appeal was taken to a higher court or because the appeal was dismissed, or no appeal lies, neither party will be allowed in a future suit or proceeding between the same parties to canvass the matter again.”

7. Recently, in Prem Kishore v. Brahm Prakash reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 356, the Supreme Court reiterated the requirements for the principle of res judicata to apply. The relevant portion has been extracted below: -

“34. …For res judicata to apply, the matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue in the former suit. Further, the suit should have been decided on merits and the decision should have attained finality. (See Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat reported in (2021) 9 SCC 99).”

8. From the afore-cited judgments, the essential conditions for doctrine of res judicata to apply can be deduced as follows:

a. The previous suit is decided,

b. The issues in the subsequent suit were directly and substantially the issues in the former suit,

c. The former suit was between the same parties or parties through whom they claim, litigating under the same title; and

d. These issues were adjudicated and finally decided by a court competent to try the subsequent suit.

9. The issues raised by the said applicants before me have already been adjudicated and decided by Justice Soumen Sen vide order dated April 26, 2017. I am of the firm opinion that if a particular issue has been decided in a suit between the parties, then by applying the doctrine of finality and res judicata, such matter should not be reopened by a coordinate bench. It goes without saying that the aggrieved applicants were always at a liberty to have preferred an appeal against the said order dismissing their shebaiti rights which, in the instant case, was not attempted by the said applicants.

10. Instead, to my utter dismay, I find that the applicants have been incessantly filing applications and making representations before erstwhile and present Chairman-cum-Special Officers even after being clearly instructed by earlier orders of this Court to approach the appropriate forum in order to assert claim over their shebaitship.

11. For the reasons mentioned above, I see no novice grounds for entertaining the said interlocutory applications being G.A. No. 36 of 2023 and G.A. No. 37 of 2023 in C.S. No. 308 of 1872 and the same stand dismissed.

12. Now, coming to the prayers raised in G.A. No. 30 of 2021, the applicants had sought appointment of a special officer to determine the voting rights of the heirs of the shebaits who have expired since the last elections held on March 02, 2019 and the requirement to conduct fresh elections due to death of an elected trustee namely, Indrajit Sarkar.

13. After hearing the parties, I had, vide order dated March 10, 2022, appointed Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, Former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, as Chairman-cum-Special Officer to determine the voting rights and/or extent of shares of the heirs of the sebaits. He was also requested to hold fresh elections within three months from date and submit his report to this Court by June 06, 2022. Accordingly, the newly constituted Board of Trustees would have to take charge on or before June 13, 2022.

14. In G.A. No. 34 of 2022, the elections which were carried out in accordance with the said order of this Court has been challenged. The intervenors herein seeks to contest the validity of the elections on the ground that the rules, regulations and the general procedure of the elections were not formulated as per the Scheme of Administration framed by this Court and are unreasonable/arbitrary in nature intended to resist the applicants and other sebaits from participating in the elections.

15. I have extensively perused the Report dated June 02, 2022 submitted by the Chairman-cum-Special Officer in compliance with this Court’s order dated March 10, 2022. Basis the said Report, I have delineated below the relevant steps taken by the Chairman-cum-Special Officer in relation to preparation of voter list and conduct of elections: -

a. As according to the order dated March 10, 2022, a notice was issued inviting suggestions from sebaits and accordingly, the same was published in the newspapers, ‘The Telegraph’ and ‘Bartaman’ in their daily edition on March 18, 2022.

b. In total 16 suggestions were received from different sebaits/group of sebaits mainly on the following points –

i. To avoid waste of money, a caution money should be introduced for participating candidates standing for election as Trustee;

ii. Such caution money should be forfeited if a minimum support/vote is not received by such candidate;

iii. Attendance on the day of election will be compulsory otherwise caution money to be forfeited;

iv. Identification of the sebaits through identity cards;

v. Do away with the practice of voting through authorised representative/proxy voting;

vi. Availability of sebait/voter list of previous election;

vii. Chance of sebaits left out during earlier elections to have their name recorded in the voter list/re-calculation of extent of shares.

c. Certain changes were made to the existing set of Rules and Guidelines earlier framed by Dr Tapas Banerjee and approved by this Court to hold free and fair election with transparency, without causing waste of the vital resources of the temple. Some of these changes are as follows: -

i. The Chairman cum Special Officer shall determine the voting rights and/or extent of shares of the heirs of the sebaits in terms of the order of the Hon'ble High Court, after revising the last available list of sebaits as updated upto 30th January, 2016.

ii. For the purpose of such determination of the voting rights and/or extent of shares of the heirs of the sebaits as above, the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased sebaits will be invited within the date and time notified, to file his/her claim for sebaitship of Dakshineswar Kali Temple and Debottar Estate, in writing, along with evidence, viz., death certificate of the deceased sebait with proof of sebaitship of the deceased sebait (together with their own photo identity proof) in support of his/her claim to be sebait as heir of the deceased sebait.

iii. The sebait willing to contest the election, will have to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only in cash as caution money along with his/her nomination. Deposit of such caution money will be a condition precedent for allowing him/her to contest the election.

iv. The procedure for election will be voting by ballot maintaining secrecy and privacy of the choice of the sebaits.

v. The votes cast by the sebaits carry value as per stirpes in terms of the orders of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the calculations of percentage of vote will be as per value recorded in the voters list.

d. The updated rules along with election notice were uploaded on the said official website of Dakshineswar Kali Temple www.dakshineswarkalitemple.org on April 08, 2022. Additionally, the abridged version of the notice was published in Telegraph and Bartaman on April 11, 2022.

e. Since the voter list prepared in 2019 was not approved by this Court, the same was not considered and the 2016 voter list was followed.

f. Pursuant to the said election notification, 90 applications were received for enlistment of their names as sebaits as well as for recording their present share in the voter list. Applications received after the stipulated time was also considered and heard on April 24, 2022 in the temple office.

g. The Chairman-cum-Special Officer has addressed all the applications and recorded his reasonings in great detail preparing a calculation sheet. Subsequently, the revised voter list was posted on the official website of the temple www.dakshineswarkalitemple.org on April 25, 2022.

h. Applications for nomination along with caution money were to be received on April 26, 2022 between 1600 to 1800 hours. A total of three applications were received following all the preconditions as enlisted in the said Election Notice.

i. Since there were only three applications for the three-member board of trustees, there was no necessity for voting by ballot or through postal ballot. Accordingly, the scheduled elections on May 22, 2022 were cancelled. It is to be noted that such circumstances had previously occurred in the years of 1989, 2004 and 2013 and the same was approved by this Court.

j. Notice post nomination and declaration of results was first posted on the official website www.dakshineswarkalitemple.org on April 29, 2022 and the same was published in the daily issues of the newspapers, ‘The Telegraph’ and ‘Bartaman’ on May 03, 2022.

k. Post the date of scrutiny of the nomination papers (April 28, 2022) and declaration of results, the Chairman-cum-Special Officer had received five letters which he had duly replied to.

16. I am of the firm opinion that the said Report meticulously elucidated the entire election process including the election notification for holding the elections in terms of this Court’s order dated March 10, 2022, the updated rules, revised voter list with inclusion of new shebaits with their respective share in shebaiti right and the notification post nomination and declaration of three trustees of new board of trustees, among others. At any stage of the entire process, I did not find any unholy nexus or mala fide intention as claimed by the applicants.

17. Therefore, I hereby accept and affirm the Report dated June 02, 2022 of the Chairman-cum-Special Officer regarding election of three Trustees for constituting Board of Trustees for management of Dakshineswar Kali Temple and Debottar Estate including the fresh Voter’s List of 2022 prepared by the Chairman-cum-Special Officer and the election result declared in the said Report dated June 02, 2022.

18. Accordingly, G.A. No. 30 of 2021 is disposed of. As far as the prayers in G.A. No. 34 of 2022 are concerned, the same are contrary to the prayers allowed in G.A. No. 30 of 2021 and hence, stands dismissed.

19. The three Trustees who have been elected, namely, Kusal Chowdhury, Samarendranath Sarkar, and Ashok Das are hereby instructed to take over the charge of the Board immediately and function as per the framework for management of the Dakhineswar Temple and the Debottar Estate for the stipulated period of three years with effect from June 13, 2022.

20. It is directed that the outgoing Board of Trustees shall extend full cooperation to the new Board of Trustees for a smooth handover of management of Dakshineswar Kali Temple and Debottar Estate. Notwithstanding such handling over the outgoing Board of Trustees shall be responsible for preparation of the up-to-date accounts till the date of handing over charge.

21. It is further directed that the incoming Board of Trustees shall operate the Bank accounts including the Fixed Deposits and Lockers held in the name of Trustees of the Dakshineswar Temple and Debottar Estate.

22. All parties including the outgoing Board of Trustees, the incoming Board of Trustees, the shebaits, the banks and all other stakeholders are directed to act on a server copy of this order.

23. There shall be no order as to costs in any of the applications herein.

24. Lastly, it is recorded that the Chairman-cum-Special Officer had humbly declined the remuneration of Rs. 10 lakhs as directed to be paid by this Court’s order dated March 10, 2022. However, all costs and expenses as claimed by the Chairman-cum-Special Officer have been duly reimbursed. Additionally, I would want to place on record this Court’s deep appreciation and gratitude for Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, Chairman-cum-Special Officer, for his poignant and immaculate work and assistance to this Court in electing the new Board of Trustees for the Dakshineshwar Kali Temple and the Debottar Estate.

25. An urgent photostat copy of this order, if applied for, should be made available to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities.