- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 54492 OF 2017 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: 1. CHOLPADY SREE VENUGOPALAKRISHNA TEMPLE KABETTU, KARKALA 574 104, UDUPI DISTRICT 2. MR. SANKETH UPADHYAYA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O. LATE. KVS UPADHYAYA, KABETTU, KARKALA 574 104, UDUPI DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOIUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, STATE OF KARNATAKA, MALE MAHADESHWARA BUILDING, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU 560018 2. HINDU RELIGIOIUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS INSTITUTIONS, REP BY ITS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HR & CE & PRISIDENT, ZILLA DHARMIKA PARISHAD, RAJATHADRI, MANI 576 104. UDUPI DISTRICT 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOIUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, UDUPI DISTRICT, RAJATHADRI Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 MANIPAL-576104 UDUPI DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS 4. SRI PRAVEEN CHANDRA SHETTY S/O LATE VITTALA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT KATTEMAR PADE HOUSE KABETTU, KARKALA UDUPI DISTRICT-574104. …IMPLEADING APPLICANT (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA FOR R1, R3 & ALSO R2; SRI. PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICATION ON I.A.1/2018) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH NOTIFICATION NO. OVS/EST(2) CR 71/2012-13/57169 DATED 3.12.2012 AT ANNEX-E IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER TEMPLE AT SL. NO. 33 OF KARKALA TALUK AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Quash Notification No. DVS/EST(2) CR 71/2012- 13/57169 dated 03.12.2012 (Annexure-E) in so far as petitioner Temple at Sl.No.33 of Karkala Taluk. b. Quash the Notification in TR S CR 05/2016-17 dated 22.9.2017 (Annexure-J). c. Grant such Other relief as this Hon’ble Court deem fit to. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 2. There is a claim that Cholpady Venugopalakrishna temple situated at Karkala Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District now Udupi District is a hereditary temple maintained by the petitioner's family and in that regard, reference and reliance is placed on various documents. The petitioner had approached this Court being aggrieved by the notification of Annexure-E dated 03.12.2012 inviting applications for management of this temple as also by way of Annexure-J which is another notification issued inviting applications for management of the said temple. 3. The submission of Sri.Chandranath Ariga.K., learned counsel for the petitioner is that; 3.1. The notification at Annexure-J has spent itself in as much as a time period has lapsed and no management committee has been appointed to the aforesaid temple. Insofar as Annexure-E is concerned, he submits that there were various representation and documents that were - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 submitted by the petitioner for deleting the aforesaid temple from the list of Category-C temples maintained by the endowment commissioner. 3.2. All the documents having been submitted, his contention is that proceedings under Section 20-A of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 (for short hereinafter referred to as Act of 1997) ought to have been taken up, the objection of the petitioner considered on the basis of the documents submitted and necessary orders passed thereon. 3.3. The same not having been done, his contention is that the aforesaid temple could not have been categorized as the Category-C temple inviting applications for management of the said temple. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 4. Sri.Prasanna.V.R., learned counsel for the impleading applicants submits that; 4.1. The impleading applicant had applied under aforesaid notification at Annexure-J and as such is an aggrieved party. If at all the representation of the petitioner were to be considered and the temple denotified, then the interest of the impleading applicant would suffer. As such, he submitted that the impleading applicant is required to be brought on record and contest the matter. 5. Learned AGA submits that though representation of the petition was submitted by petitioner by endorsement dated 01.04.2021, the petitioner was called upon to furnish further details which were not so furnished and in that background the endorsement came to be issued and subsequent thereto, the notifications were issued since the petitioner did not comply with the requirements, the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 proceedings could not be taken up under Section 20- A of the Act of 1997. 6. Heard Sri.Chandranath Ariga.K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Prasanna.V.R., learned counsel appearing for the impleading applicant and learned AGA for the State. Perused papers. 7. Insofar as the impleading applicant is concerned, the impleading applicant claims to be a devotee of the temple as also an applicant under a notification invited by respondent No.3, I am of the considered opinion that by only being a devotee and an applicant, the impleading applicant would not have any locus to be impleaded in the present proceedings. 8. The lis in the present matter is as to whether the petitioner No.1-temple can be classified as Category- C temple or not and in that regard, though there is a classification made a representation has been - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 submitted by the petitioner for deletion of the same and proceedings ought to have been taken up under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997. The lis therefore essentially is between the petitioner and respondents No.1 and 2 where the impleading applicant cannot seek to come on record and agitate his grievances. 9. If at all the impleading applicant has any documents which may be of relevance for the matter, the impleading applicant can always submit those documents to the Rajya Dharmika Parishad which would consider the representation of the petitioner under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997. 10. The submission of leaned AGA is that all the documents have not been furnished by the petitioner, whereas the contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the documents have been furnished. 11. If that be so, it is for the petitioner to make available the concerned documents, which the learned counsel - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 for the petitioner submits would be done within a period of 15 days from today to enable respondent No.1 to consider the said representation and initiate proceedings under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997. 12. In that view of the matter, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is partly allowed. ii. The notification dated 22.09.2017 at Annexure- J not having been acted upon has been rendered in fructuous. iii. Insofar as the notification dated 03.12.2012 at Annexure-E is concerned, the same shall be subject to the result of the representation submitted by the petitioner, which would have to be considered by the Rajya Dharmika Parishad under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997 upon the petitioner satisfying respondent No.1 that all the documents had been furnished. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 iv. If respondent No.1 is so satisfied, respondent No.1 is directed to forward the matter to the Rajya Dharmika Parishad for registration of the proceedings under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997 and proceed therewith. v. In the event of such proceedings being registered under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997, the impleading applicant is permitted to place on record the documents said to be in possession of the impleading applicant for consideration of the Rajya Dharmika Parishad. vi. The documents placed by the impleading applicant shall be considered by Rajya Dharmika Parishad insofar as the lis under Section 20-A of the Act of 1997 is concerned. Any other document if placed on record by the impleading applicant can always be ignored by the Rajya Dharmika Parishad. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:14765 WP No. 54492 of 2017 vii. The documents to be furnished by the petitioner within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and an order to be passed by respondent No.1-Commissioner within 30 days of such receipt of the documents by the commissioner. viii. In the event of the commissioner placing the matter before the Rajya Dharmika Parishad, the Rajya Dharmika Parishad is directed to consider the matter in accordance with law. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13