IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.43188/2017 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN:
SRI D. SEENAIAH S/O LATE DODDAKUNTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS SHANTHINAGAR, BEHIND SHANESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, PANDAVAPURA TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 434 [ (BY SRI VIJAY KRISHNA BHAT, ADV.) AND:
1. THE ENDOWMENT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, ALUR VENKAT RAO ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571 401 ... PETITIONER 3. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571 401 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/ ADMINISTRATORS SRI CHELUVANARAYANASWAMY TEMPLE, MELKOTE, PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA-571 401 5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI CHELUVANARAYANASWAMY TEMPLE, MELKOTE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA-571 431 6. SRI SRINIVASA NARASIMHAN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O LATE S NAGARAJ IYENGAR SRI CHELUVANARAYANASWAMY TEMPLE, RAJA STREET, MELKOTE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 431 7. SRI MAHADEVASWAMY MAJOR, NO.EWS, CHURCH STREET, E & F BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNANAGARA, MYSURU-570 021 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI LAKSHMINARAYAN, AGA. FOR R1-R5 NOTICE TO R6 & R7 D/W V/C/O DT:06.10.2017) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO QUASH THE ORDER SAID TO HAVE BEEN PASSED ON 09.08.2017 AT ANNEX-Q ISSUED BY THE R-3 AND QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 03.04.2017 AT ANNEX-J ISSUED BY THE R-1 TO THE R-2 DIRECTING THE R-2 TO HOLD AN ENQUIRY UNDER SECTION 25B(6)(III).
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.1 to 5 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. Considering the nature of disposal, notice to respondents No. 6 and 7 is not necessary.
2. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 09.08.2017 as at Annexure-Q to the petition.
3. Learned Government Advocate would at the outset point out that as against the order impugned herein, the petitioner has the remedy of revision as provided under Section 63 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute the legal position but however would seek that the said liberty be granted to the petitioner to file the revision and interest of the petitioner be protected till then. In a normal circumstance when an alternate remedy is available, the interim direction if any is also to be considered by the competent authority. However since the petitioner has the liberty of seeking for such interim relief before the revisional authority, it is made clear that if the impugned order dated 09.08.2017 has not been given effect to as on this date, the same shall be kept in abeyance till the interim application to be filed by the petitioner along with the revision petition is considered and disposed of by the revisional authority. This is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall file such revision petition within three weeks from this date.
5. It is further made clear that the interim protection granted herein would only be available till a consideration is made by the revisional authority relating to the interim prayer, if any. All contentions in that regard are left open.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE hrp/bms