IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.53949 OF 2014 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN 1. B.MANJUNATHA RAO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYANA RAO, R/O YELLICODE SHIVAPURA VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ.
2. SRINIVAS HEBBAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O VISHWANATH HEBBAR, SHIVAPURA VILLAGE, DEVASTHANABETTU, KARKALA TQ.
3. RAMA BELLIRAYA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O LATE PRABHAKAR BELLIIRAYA, SHIVAPURA VILLAGE, NAIRCODE KARKALA TQ.
4. MADHAVA SERIGARA AGED ABOUT 49 YEAS, S/O LATE SHIVAYYA SHERIGARA, SHIVAPURA VILLAGE, DEVASTHANABETTU, KARKALA TQ.
5. PREMA POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, W/O ANAND POOJARY, R/O YEDHE, SHIRVA VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ. ... PETITIONERS (By SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE RAJYA DHARMIKA PARISHATH TRIBUNAL CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE- 577 001 BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.
2. ZILLA DHARMIKA PARISHATH & DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, OFFICER OF THE COMMISSIONER, UDUPI DIST-576 101.
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX, RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101.
4. REVENUE INSPECTOR ADMINISTRATOR AZEKAR HOBLI, SHANKARA TEMPLE, SHIVAPURA, KARKALA TQ, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101.
5. MOHANDAS NAYAK, S/O RAMANNA NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, "MAHALAKSHMI", MOORASALU, SHIVAPUR VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ – 574 104.
6. JAYASHEELA HEGDE D/O SANKAPPA HEGDE, R/O YEDTHEMANE, SHIVAPURR VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ– 574 104.
7. SHANTHA NAYAK W/O MUDHU NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, BHAVANI PRASAD NILAYA, R/O KACHILA MALABETTU, SHIVAPUR VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ– 574 104.
8. SUNANDA KULALTHI W/O RAJU KULALA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, VANYALA MANE, MULLU GUDDE, SHIVAPUR VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ– 574 104 .. RESPONDENTS (By SRI.K.A.ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R5- ABSENT SMT.SADHANA DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 SRI.V.SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R-3 AND 4 R6, R7 AND R8 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEX-F DTD.7.11.2014 PASSED BY THE R-1, DIRECT THE R-2 TO TAKE OVER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE AFFAIRS OF THE SHANKARA TEMPLE TILL THE ENQUIRY IN RESPECT OF MISAPPROPRIATION OF TEMPLE FUNS BY THE R-5 IS COMPLETED.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri.K.A.Arigna, learned Counsel for the petitioners. Sri.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader, for the respondents No.3 and 4. Smt.Sadhana Desai, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner, inter alia, seeks writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 7.11.2014 as well as writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to take over the management of the affairs of Shankara temple till the enquiry in respect of misappropriation of funds of temple is concluded by respondent No.5.
3. Facts giving rise to the filing of this petition briefly stated are that, petitioners and respondents No.5 to 9 are the members of the Committee of Shankara temple situated in Shivapura taluk, Udupi District. The aforesaid members were appointed on 29.11.2012 for a period of three years. Respondent No.5 was elected as President. Respondent No.5 instead of administering the affairs of the temple in a transparent manner, indulged in financial irregularities. Thereafter, a compliant was made by petitioner No.5 to respondent No.2.
4. Respondent No.2 issued notice to respondent No.5 to appear before him on 25.6.2014 and to submit a reply with regard to charges which were made by the petitioners herein against respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 submitted a reply. However, respondent No.2 appointed respondent No.4- Revenue Inspector as Administrator to manage the affairs of the Shankara Temple. Being aggrieved, respondent Nos. 5 to 9 filed appeal on the ground that the aforesaid order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to them. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition is filed.
5. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the impugned order dated 7.11.2014 be quashed and the matter be remitted to respondent No.2 viz., Zilla Dharmik Parashath and Deputy Commissioner to conduct an enquiry expeditiously in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission made and in the facts of the case, the impugned order is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to Zilla Dharmik Parishath and Deputy Commissioner/respondent No.2 with a direction to conduct an enquiry afresh, affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties and to conclude the same by a speaking order within a period of six months from today.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of.
sd/- JUDGE ln.