IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.47535/2017 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN:
SRI. SUBHASHCHANDRA HEGDE S/O SANJEEVA HEGDE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS “DODDAMANE”, MAJOOR VILLAGE AND POST KAUP UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT – 574 106 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAJESH SHETTIGAR, ADV.) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS MALAI MAHADESHWARA BUILDING ALUR VENKATA RAO ROAD CHAMRAJPET BANGALORE – 560 018.
2. RAJYA DHARMIKA PARISHATH MALAI MAHADESHWARA BUILDING ALUR VENKATA RAO ROAD CHAMRAJPET BANGALORE – 560 018 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS RAJATHADRI UDUPI – 576 104 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT UDUPI – 576 104 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.A.SUBRAMANI, HCGP FOR R1, R3 & R4; SRI. B.S.SACHIN, ADV., FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R-1 TO DISPOSE OFF THE CASE FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE – K AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO PROCEED IN THE CONSTITUTION OF FRESH MANAGING COMMITTEE FOR ADMINISTRATION OF “SRI VISHNUMOORTHY TEMPLE MAJOOR”.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.1, 3 and 4. Sri B.S.Sachin, learned counsel to accept notice for respondent No.2. They are permitted to file their memo of appearance/vakalath in the registry within four weeks.
2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to direct the respondent No.1 to dispose of the case pending before the respondent No.2. Further, the petitioner is seeking issue of mandamus to the respondents not to constitute the fresh Managing Committee for administration of Sri Vishnumurthy Temple, Majooru, Udupi District.
3. The petitioner, at an earlier instance claiming to be aggrieved by the action of the respondents has preferred the proceedings before the respondent No.2 which is pending in No.RDP:TRI:06/17-18. In the said proceedings, the right as claimed by the petitioner in respect of the said temple is to be decided. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said proceedings has not been disposed of by the respondent No.2 but, in the meanwhile, steps are being taken to constitute a Managing Committee to the Temple. It is in that view, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. In a matter of the present nature, since a detailed consideration is to be made in the pending proceedings, this Court, at this juncture would not be justified in directing the respondent No.2 to dispose of the proceedings in a particular manner or within a time frame as sought by the petitioner. However, if in the meanwhile, the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the constitution of the Managing Committee and even if such Managing Committee is constituted in the meanwhile, certainly, the petitioner would be entitled to seek for appropriate interim orders in the said proceedings itself. If such application is filed before the respondent No.2 against such action, such application shall be considered in accordance with law by the respondent No.2 and if the respondent No.2 is not in a position to dispose of the appeal itself, in such event, appropriate orders be passed on the interim application in accordance with law within a time frame. In that regard, it is directed that the respondent No.2 shall take a decision on the interim application, if any filed by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date on which the application is filed.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST