- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49030 WP No. 8978 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 8978 OF 2022 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAMESH S/O LATE GANGAIAH AGED 48 YEARS 2. SRI KANTHARAJU S/O LATE GANGAIAH AGED 37 YEARS 3. SRI LAKSHMINARASAIAH S/O LATE CHIKKANARASAIAH AGED 88 YEARS 4. SRI BHEEMANNA S/O LATE CHIKKANARASAIAH AGED 85 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT DODDAMALLAVADI VILLAGE BHAKTHARAHALLI HOBLI KOTHAGERE HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 120 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.N. NITISH., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K V NARASIMHAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49030 WP No. 8978 of 2022 NEAR VICTORIA HOSPITAL CHAMARAJPET BANGALORE - 560 018 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR - 572 101 3. THE TAHSILDAR KUNIGAL TALUK KUNIGAL TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 130 4. SRI NARASIMHAMURTHY S/O LATE NARASAPPA AGED 61 YEARS 5. SRI D N RAMANNA S/O LATE NARASAPPA AGED 66 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.4 & 5 ARE R/AT DODDAMALLAVADI VILLAGE BHAKTHARAHALLI HOBLI KOTHAGERE HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 120 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. M.S. MANJANNA., ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 10.03.2022 AT ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE R-1 BEARING NO ADM7/AP/5/2019-20.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION OF THE ORDER DATED 10.03.2022 AT ANNEXURE-D PASED BY THE R-1 BEARING NO. ADM 7/AP 5/2019-20. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49030 WP No. 8978 of 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 10.03.2022 (Annexure 'D') in case No.ADM 7/AP 5/2019-20 passed by respondent No.1. 2. Heard Sri K.N.Nitish, on behalf of K.V.Narasimhan learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 3 and Sri M.S.Manjanna, learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5. 3. Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the performance of the pooja in Sree Narasimhaswamy Temple, Doddamallalavadi Village, Kothagere Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakuru District is being made by the legal representatives of the original propositus, Chikkanarasaiah. It is also to be noted that, the Temple in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49030 WP No. 8978 of 2022 question is notified under the provisions of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997. 4. In the proceedings before respondent No.3, the legal representatives of the original propositus had agreed to perform pooja by each branch for a period of one year as per the order dated 19.01.2018 (Annexure 'A'). 5. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that respondent No.1 has committed an error in interfering with the order passed by respondent No.3 wherein, the performance of pooja by the original propositus and his legal representatives are hereditary in nature and therefore, as equitable distribution of performance of pooja has been made in terms of the compromise entered into between the legal representatives of the deceased Chikkanarasaiah, the respondent No.1 has committed an error in appointing one of the branches of Chikkanarasiah to perform the pooja. It is also to be noted that respondent No.1 has referred to the Panchayat Partition Deed dated 15.03.1998 to decide the matter in which the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49030 WP No. 8978 of 2022 respondent No.1 has no jurisdiction to interfere with the civil rights of the parties except with regard to the performance of the pooja which is hereditary in nature. 6. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 7. In the result, I pass the following ORDER i) The Writ petition is allowed. ii) The order dated 10.03.2022 (Annexure 'D') passed by respondent No.1 is herein set aside. iii) The order dated 19.01.2018 (Annexure 'A') passed by respondent No.3 is hereby confirmed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL