Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 367 (KAR)

Lokesh v. Government of Karnataka

2015-04-01

A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA

body2015
Order A.N. Venugopal Gowda, J. 1. Without going into the merit or otherwise of the contentions advanced by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, including maintainability of the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner, under the provisions of Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 (for short, 'the Act'), W.P. No. 7209 of 2006 was allowed in part on 2-2-2009 and the impugned orders therein, passed by the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner were quashed and the proceeding was remitted for consideration afresh by extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. W.P. Nos. 28141 to 28144 and 28063 of 2010 filed by the contesting parties were disposed of, on 25-11-2010, in terms of the order as at Annexure-G. 2. Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division, having passed an order dated 21-8-2014 vide Annexure-H, assailing the same, W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014 were filed. Finding that the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division had not conducted the proceedings and decided the case in terms of the order dated 2-2-2009 passed in W.P. No. 7209 of 2006, writ petitions were allowed and the impugned orders therein were quashed. Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division was directed to decide the case by keeping in view the observations made in the order passed in W.P. No. 7209 of 2006 with expedition and within a period of three months commencing from 5-11-2014. 3. Petitioners having appeared on 5-11-2014, before the 4th respondent, filed written arguments and also filed an application filed under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 stating that there is disobedience of order dated 17-10-2014 and requested not to allow the 7th respondent to continue in the post of Poojari of the 5th respondent-temple. A notice dated 8-11-2014 having been received from the 4th respondent, this petition was filed on 10-11-2014, to direct the 2nd respondent to withdraw the case, as at Annexure-F, from the 4th respondent and transfer the same to the 3rd respondent, for consideration and decision in accordance with law. A notice dated 8-11-2014 having been received from the 4th respondent, this petition was filed on 10-11-2014, to direct the 2nd respondent to withdraw the case, as at Annexure-F, from the 4th respondent and transfer the same to the 3rd respondent, for consideration and decision in accordance with law. That apart, a mandamus has been sought as against the 1st respondent, to initiate disciplinary action against 4th and 6th respondents, on account of their alleged failure to discharge the duties, with a further direction to the 5th respondent to handover to the petitioners, hereditary rights of poojari work in the 5th respondent-temple, as per the rotation and in terms of the order dated 17-10-2014 passed in W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014. 4. By an order dated 4-3-2015, in view of the submissions made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, that Karnataka Act No. 33 of 2001, as amended by Karnataka Act No. 27 of 2011, does not authorise the Assistant Commissioner, to decide the disputes relating to hereditary rights of Archaks and in view of Section 25-B(6)(iii) of the Act, as amended on 4-5-2011 vide Karnataka Act No. 27 of 2011, Deputy Commissioner alone is authorised to decide the disputes in relation to hereditary rights of Archaks, Hon'ble Sri SANJ, being of the opinion that the order as at Annexure-J, dated 17-10-2014, passed in W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014, needs clarification, directed the Registry to place these petitions, before this Bench, by obtaining orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice. 5. Heard Sri M. Veerabhadraiah, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Sri A.S. Ponnanna, learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of respondents 1 to 6 and Sri G. Krishnamurthy, learned Senior Advocate for respondent 7 and Sri R. Shivcharan, learned Advocate for respondent 8 and perused the writ record. 6. Learned Counsel on both sides submitted that the Deputy Commissioner alone is authorised to decide the dispute in this matter, which relates to the hereditary rights of Archak/s. The said aspect, as conceded by the learned Advocates on both sides, was not brought to the notice of this Court, when W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014 were decided on 17-10-2014. 47397 to 47399 of 2014 were decided on 17-10-2014. The reason for remanding of the case, as per the said order, was on account of the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division having not conducted the case in terms of Section 32 of the Act and by observing the principles of natural justice. 7. Since learned Counsel on both sides submitted that it is the Deputy Commissioner, who is the Competent Authority to decide the lis between the petitioner and respondent 7, in the matter of performance of duty of Archak/s in the 5th respondent-temple, there is a need to modify order dated 17-10-2014, allowing W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014. It is to be observed that after the said order was passed, no order has been passed by the 4th respondent and the case has remained at the same stage. 8. Respondent 7 has filed W.A. Nos. 2935 to 2938 of 2014, assailing the order dated 17-10-2014 passed in W.P. Nos. 47397 to 47399 of 2014. Sri G. Krishnamurthy, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the 7th respondent, who is the appellant in the said writ appeals, submitted that a memo was filed in the Registry today, to dispose of the writ appeals as not pressed. Learned Counsel submitted that, even otherwise, in view of the clarification of the order with regard to the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner to decide the matter, it is unnecessary for the appellants in the said writ appeals to prosecute the same and seek further orders. Submission of Sri G. Krishnamurthy, Senior Advocate, stands recorded. 9. Keeping in view, the submissions made by the learned Advocates and also the provision under Section 25-B(6)(iii) of the Act, read with Sections 6 and 8 of the Mysore General Clauses Act, 1899, Deputy Commissioner being Competent Authority to decide the inter se dispute between the petitioner and the 7th respondent, in the matter of performance of the duty of Archak in the 5th respondent-Temple, the proceedings of the case pursuant to the order dated 2-2-2009 passed in W.P. No. 7209 of 2006 and the order dated 17-10-2014 in W.P. Nos. 47393 to 47399 of 2014, is modified. 10. The present incumbent of the Office of the 3rd respondent being not a person professing Hindu Religion, cannot decide the matter. 47393 to 47399 of 2014, is modified. 10. The present incumbent of the Office of the 3rd respondent being not a person professing Hindu Religion, cannot decide the matter. In the circumstances, also keeping in view the time-bound direction issued as per the aforesaid order dated 17-10-2014 (Annexure-J), the case, as directed therein, is remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkaballapur District. Both parties shall appear before the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkaballapur District, on 20-4-2015 and receive further orders. The said Authority shall take into consideration the orders, as at Annexures-B, D, G and J and decide the matter on or before 30-6-2015. Since no relief has been sought against the 8th respondent, he being neither a necessary nor proper party, the petition as against the said respondent is dismissed. The 4th respondent is hereby directed to transmit the entire record of the case, on or before 17-4-2015, to the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkaballapur District. There is no need for the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkaballapur District to issue notice of hearing of the case to either of the parties, in view of the direction issued herein i.e., to appear before the said Authority, on 20-4-2015 and receive further orders. No costs. Petition Dismissed.