Judgment Manjunath, J. This appeal is by the convener of a temple questioning the legality and correctness of the order passed by the State of Karnataka dated 30.4.2002 taking over Shree Udisalu Kempamma Temple and its properties invoking the provisions of Section 18 of the Mysore Religious and Charitable Institution Act, 1927 and directing the Tahsildar to take over the administration of the temple appointing him as an administrator till further orders. 2. On a complaint lodged by the villagers of Nanavinakere in regard to the mismanagement of the temple income and its property by the committee, the Assistant Commissioner, Tiptur Sub-division, Tiptur submitted a report to the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur and in turn, the Deputy Commissioner requested the Endowment Commissioner to take action in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Endowment Commissioner sent a proposal to take over the temple exercising power under Section 18 of the Act. The Government, by exercising its power under Section 18 of the Act, has appointed the Tahsildar, Tiptur taluk as a administrator and directed him to take over possession of the temple and its property. This order was questioned by the appellant by filing writ petition in W.P. No. 25153/2002 on the ground that the order passed by the Government is contrary to the provisions of Sections 16 to 18 of the Act and that no enquiry was conducted in accordance with law and therefore, requested the Court to quash the order passed by the Government. 3. A learned Single Judge of this Court rejected the writ petition on the ground that the appellant did not question before respondents 2 and 3 about their competency to hold an enquiry and that no illegality has been committed in exercising powers under Section 18 of the Act. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. We have heard Sri Ashok Haranahalli, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Gangadhar Sangolli, learned AGA for the respondents. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant admits the temple as Religious and Charitable Institution and the same has to be regulated under the provisions of the Religious and Charitable Institutions Act, 1927. If the members of the committee of management have mismanaged the property or misappropriated the funds of the temple, the Muzrai Officer has to conduct an enquiry under Section 17 read with Section 37 of the Act. If the members of the committee of management have mismanaged the property or misappropriated the funds of the temple, the Muzrai Officer has to conduct an enquiry under Section 17 read with Section 37 of the Act. Thereafter, if the Muzrai Officer has come to conclusion that there is gross mismanagement of the institution or misappropriated or mismanaged and if the trustees have committed breach of trust, he may, with the previous sanction of the Government, take action as contemplated under Section 18 of the Act. Contending that the Muzrai officer viz., Assistant Commissioner, Tiptur Sub-division has not initiated enquiry as required under Sections 17 and 37 of the Act and that the order passed by the Government based on the recommendation of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments is bad in law, the learned Counsel requests the Court to allow the writ appeal. According to him, the learned Single Judge did not consider how an institution has to be taken over from the committee of management and that such power has to be exercised only under Section 18 of the Act and such power has to be exercised only by Muzrai Officer and not by the Government. He further contends that when no enquiry as contemplated under Section 17 is conducted and that Muzrai Officer who has to exercise his powers under Section 18 has not obtained any sanction of the Government, the order, appointing the Tahsildar as administrator to take over the management of the temple and its property is to be held as bad in law. 6. Learned Government Advocate sought to support the order passed by the State Government as well as the order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, he is unable to convince the Court that whether any enquiry under Section 17 read with Section 37 of the Act was conducted by the Muzrai Officer in accordance with the Act and whether Government has granted permission (for) the Muzrai Officer to take action in accordance with Section 18 of the Act and in the absence of such procedure followed by the Muzrai Officer, any order passed by the Government exercising its power contrary to Sections 17 and 18 would be valid. 7. In this context, it would be useful to refer to Sections 17, 18 and 37, which are reproduced as hereunder: “17. 7. In this context, it would be useful to refer to Sections 17, 18 and 37, which are reproduced as hereunder: “17. When it is brought to the notice of the Muzrai Officer that any religious or charitable institution dedicated for the benefit of the public or a defined section of the public or any property pertaining thereto is being grossly mismanaged, he may institute an enquiry into the truth of the allegations against the persons in possession and management of the property or the institution.” 18. If it is proved that there has been gross mismanagement of the institution or of any property pertaining thereto or any misapplication or misappropriation of any part of the property, or any breach of trust in respect thereof, the Muzrai Officer may, with the previous sanction of the Government, (1) take the institution under the management of Government; (2) order that the property which has been mismanaged or misappropriated shall be delivered back either to the institution or to the possession of the Government on behalf of the institution; (3) obtain security for the proper performance of the trust or management of the property; (4) frame a scheme for the proper management of the institution or management of its property and the application thereof; and (5) pass such other ancillary or necessary orders as the case may require in accordance with justice and equity. “37. The enquiry referred to in Sections 10, 17, 20, 26 and 30 shall be conducted in manner prescribed for a formal enquiry under the Mysore Land Revenue Code, after issue of notices to the parties interested and the Muzrai Officer or other person or persons holding enquiry shall have all the powers of a Revenue Officer empowered to conduct such formal enquiry.” 8. From a combined reading of these Sections, it is clear that there shall be an enquiry in regard to gross mismanagement of the institution or of any property pertaining there to or any misapplication or misappropriation of any part of the property, or any breach of trust in respect of the temple. If such allegations are proved in an enquiry to be conducted under Section 17 read with Section 37 of the Act, the Muzrai Officer is required to obtain permission from the Government and after obtaining such sanction, he can exercise his power under Section 18 of the Act. If such allegations are proved in an enquiry to be conducted under Section 17 read with Section 37 of the Act, the Muzrai Officer is required to obtain permission from the Government and after obtaining such sanction, he can exercise his power under Section 18 of the Act. In the instant case, the action is directly taken by the Government, not following the procedure contemplated under Sections 17 and 18, but this legal question is not considered by the learned Single Judge. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in not observing the relevant provisions of law and therefore, we have to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 9. In the result, the writ appeal is allowed. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 25153/2002 dated 3.12.2002 and the order dated 30.4.2002 passed by the Government as per Annexure-A to the writ petition are hereby quashed. It is open for the Muzrai Officer to initiate action in accordance with Sections 17, 37 read with Section 18 of the Act. 10. At this stage, the learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the term of the convener has come to an end by efflux of time. If it is so, it is always open for the Muzrai Officer/concerned authority under the Act to constitute a new committee and to proceed against the earlier committee, if any misappropriation or breach of trust is committed.