IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.54357 OF 2018 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN:
K N NARASIMHA ADIGA S/O K N SUBRAYA ADIGA AGE 62 YEARS HEREDITARY ARCHAK SRI KOLLUR MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE KOLLUR, KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576 201.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI.ASHOK HARNAHALLI, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI.M E NAGESH, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS MALEMAHADESHWARA BUILDING CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU-560 019.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS RAJATHADRI UDUPI-576 101.
3. THE COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SRI KOLLUR MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE KOLLUR, UDUPI DISTRICT BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE-576 101.
4. K. N. GOVINDA ADIGA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O. LATE SRI K. N. KRISHNA ADIGA ARCHAKA, SRI MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE KOLLUR 576 220.
KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G. KRISHNA MURTHY, SR. ADV. FOR SRI CHANDRAKANTH PATIL K, ADV. FOR R3 SRI K. CHANDRAKANTH ARIGA, ADV. FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT ON I.A.1/19.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE PRAYER OF THE PETITIONER TO SUBSITUTE HIS SON IN THE PLACE OF HIS ARCHAKASHIP TO THE SRI KOLLUR MOOKAMBIKE TEMPLE, KOLLUR, UDUPI AS PER ANNEXURE-J DTD:10.7.2018.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Ashok Harnahalli, Senior Counsel along with Sri. M.E.Nagesh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. G.Krishna Murthy, Senior Counsel along with Sri.Chandrakanth Patil.K, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
Sri. K.Chandrakanth Ariga, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, it is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a writ of mandamus directing first respondent to consider the prayer of the petitioner to substitute his son in place of Archakship to the Sri Kollur Mookambike Temple, Kollur, Udupi.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a fixed time limit.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 submits that while deciding the representation made by the petitioner an opportunity shall be given to respondent No.4 to put forth his contentions with regard to the Archakship in respect of the temple in question.
5. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the first respondent be directed to decide the representation in accordance with law.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions made and in the facts of the case, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order after affording an opportunity to the petitioner as well as to respondent Nos.3 and 4 in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the parties.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB