Apart from po­lit­i­cal wran­glings, fi­nan­cial bungling, and vi­sion­less work­ing at Takht Patna Sahib, over the last four decades, the re­cent nom­i­na­tion of 3 mem­bers by Dis­trict Judge Patna Shri Ra­jiv Ran­jan Prasad, even be­fore the elec­tions to the Pra­band­hak Com­mit­tee is an­nounced, takes the cake. What is even worse is that nei­ther the Pres­i­dent nor of­fice bearer nor mem­ber of the Pra­band­hak Com­mit­tee has ex­pressed op­po­si­tion or pub­lic out­rage at this di­rect il­le­gal and malafide in­ter­ven­tion by the Dis­trict Judge.

DEEPLY UN­SET­TLED BY THIS, WSN ed­i­tor Jag­mo­han Singh writes an Open Let­ter to Jagjot Singh, Pres­i­dent, Pra­band­hak Com­mit­tee, Sri Takht Ha­ri­mandir Ji, Patna Sahib.

Dear Jagjot Singh Ji,

Wa­he­guru Ji Ka Khalsa!
Wa­he­guru Ji Ki Fateh!!

YOUR SI­LENCE at the gross in­ter­ven­tion by Dis­trict Judge Patna in the re­li­gious af­fairs and man­age­ment of Takht Patna Sahib is deeply dis­turb­ing. It is un­think­able that for any elec­tion, a nom­i­na­tion can take place be­fore the elec­tion. To date, the Bi­har State Elec­tion Au­thor­ity has not even an­nounced elec­tions, but with­out car­ing for the sen­ti­ments of the Sikh San­gat and both­er­ing about due process, you seem to have ac­cepted the nom­i­na­tion of three mem­bers by the Dis­trict Judge Patna, an­nounced on 17 June 2023 and com­mu­ni­cated to you in due course.

The or­der of the dis­trict judge refers to Ar­ti­cle 9 (1) (a) of the Con­sti­tu­tion and By­laws of the Takht Sa­heb Com­mit­tee un­der which 3 mem­bers, namely Ran­jeet Singh son of Late S. Gur­cha­ran Singh, Ran­jit Singh son of S. Sat­nam Singh and Gu­vin­dar Singh son of Late S. Trilochan Singh -all res­i­dents of Patna.

The game plan is clear. The ac­tions of Dis­trict Judge Patna are di­rectly aimed at in­flu­enc­ing the elec­tion by vot­ers and Gur­d­wara bod­ies and nom­i­na­tions by or­ga­ni­za­tions. The key ques­tion is un­der whose in­flu­ence and favour­ing whom? 

Sec­tion 9 (1) (a) sim­ply says, “Three mem­bers nom­i­nated by the Dis­trict Judge, Patna.” This does not de­volve any pow­ers on you to nom­i­nate three mem­bers prior to the elec­tion process.

Sec­tion 9 (5) reads, “The Dis­trict Judge, Patna in due course, shall de­clare the ap­point­ment of four­teen nom­i­nated or elected mem­bers of the New Com­mit­tee, if the nom­i­na­tion or elec­tion is not any way un­law­ful and shall in­form the same to the ex­ist­ing Com­mit­tee in writ­ing.” From this, it is ev­i­dent that this pro­vi­sion is in the case of the Con­sti­tu­tion of a new Com­mit­tee af­ter the elec­tion process is com­plete.

What both­ers and pains me is that your com­mit­tee and you have not seen through the act of Dis­trict Judge Patna, which is clearly di­rected to­ward in­flu­enc­ing the se­lec­tion of can­di­dates or nom­i­na­tions by other bod­ies.

I think one of the main rea­sons for your si­lence is that you re­al­ize that your very ap­point­ment was un­law­ful, be­cause, the meet­ing at which you were elected on 31 De­cem­ber 2022 was not meant for the elec­tion of the Pres­i­dent and other mem­bers of the Board. An­other shock­ing thing at the said meet­ing was that due to the vac­il­la­tion in ap­point­ing new nom­i­nees, for what­ever rea­sons, by the Dis­trict Judge Patna, sadly there were only seven mem­bers pre­sent from amongst whom, you were elected as the Pres­i­dent.

Ar­guably, the Con­sti­tu­tion and By­laws of The Pra­band­hak Com­mit­tee, Sri Takht Ha­ri­mandir Ji Patna Sa­heb, birthed in the hal­lowed halls of yore, by the then well-mean­ing Sikh lead­er­ship, have many la­cu­nae and short­com­ings. Still, it does not go as far as the Dis­trict Judge Patna has taken and you have willy-nilly en­dorsed his move by si­lence.

What­ever hap­pens in the near fu­ture, whether elec­tions are held or not, this un­prece­dented ac­tion car­ried out by the Dis­trict Judge dur­ing your tenure, of which there is no par­al­lel since the for­ma­tion of the Com­mit­tee in 1956, will go down as one of the many se­ri­ous lapses for which you will be held ex­clu­sively ac­count­able.

What per­plexes me is that I have learned that your team and co­terie are en­gaged in si­lenc­ing those in Patna who are op­posed to this among one of the many mis­ad­ven­tures of Dis­trict Judge Patna. It is the cu­ri­ous case of elec­tions that were due but nowhere to be found!  I am sure that you are aware that wait­ing for clar­ity from the Dis­trict Judge Patna, the Bi­har State Elec­tion Au­thor­ity is twid­dling its thumbs in per­plex­ity, wait­ing for the cur­tain to rise about the sta­tus and pe­riod when the new three nom­i­nees be­come el­i­gi­ble to par­tic­i­pate and vote in meet­ings and the Dis­trict Judge is now sit­ting on it. As there is no pro­vi­sion or prece­dent they are sim­ply sur­prised at the move.

In the same vein, it may be recorded that while the Dis­trict Judge has sent his no­ti­fi­ca­tion to the Pra­band­hak Com­mit­tee in rather in­nocu­ous terms and so far he has not clar­i­fied the mat­ter to the Bi­har State Elec­tion Au­thor­ity.

Jagjot Singh Ji, please do not take the Sikh San­gat for granted. Sikhs will re­spect you if you get this his­toric wrong cor­rected. It will pave the way for do­ing away with the ab­solutely un­nec­es­sary, un­called-for “gift” given by the Sikhs, al­low­ing the Dis­trict Judge to nom­i­nate as many as three of the fif­teen-mem­ber board, with­out even hav­ing a col­legium to choose from and with­out test­ing whether they ful­fill all the re­quire­ments for nom­i­na­tion.

While your si­lence may help you po­lit­i­cally in the short run, his­tory will not for­give you if you do not act on the mat­ter.

Sin­cerely per­plexed and an­gry,

Jag­mo­han Singh
Ed­i­tor, The World Sikh News