- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8334 OF 2025 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: 1. DIVAKAR ACHARIYA S/O MONAPPA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, BHARANI 39/1A, KALIYA VILLAGE GEREUKATTE POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK- 574 215. 2. JANARDHAN POOJARI S/O GURUVAPPA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/AT JYOTHY NILIYA, BELTHANGADY DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 574 215. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SACHIN B S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MEMBER SECRETARY ZILLA DHARMIKA PARSHID AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA 575 001. REGISTER UNDER HINDU Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENT ACT. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA-575 001. 3. RAGHAVENDRA M. S/O VENKATARAJI ASRANNA, MAJOR, KALIYA VILLAGE AND NALA POST, BELTHANGADI-574217. 4. NEENA KUMAR S/O RAMA NAIK, MAJOR, GEREUKATTE HOME POST KALIYA VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK-574217. 5. SMT. REETA P D/O CHANDRASHEKAR. N, MAJOR, ANNAPURNA NILIYA NYAYATARPU VILLAGE, NALA POST BELTHANGADY TALUK, DK MANGALORE-574217. 6. SMT. MOHINI D/O BOMMANNA GOWDA, MAJOR, AAKOTE MANA, NYAYATARPU VILLAGE NALA POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK DK MANGALORE-574217. 7. HEMANTH KUMAR S/O JHANADDAN M, MAJOR, J.K. NIVAS, GEREUKATTE POST KALIYA VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK DK MANGALORE-574217. 8. SHARATH KUMAR S/O GAGANATH SHETTY, MAJOR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 KULAI MEGIBAN HOUSE, KALIYA VILLAGE, GEREUKATTE POST BELTHANGADY TALUK, DK MANGALORE-574217. 9. RAGHAVA H S/O SHANTHAPPA POOJARY, MAJOR, HOSAMARADDA HOUSE, KALIYA VILLAGE, GEREUKATTE POST BELTHANGADY TALUK, DK MANGALORE-574217. 10. HARISH. K S/O TIMMANA GOWDA, MAJOR, KEREKODI MANE, NYAYATARPU VILLAGE, NALA POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK DK MANGALORE-574217. 11. B. HARISH KUMAR S/O B SANJEEVA BANGEERA, MAJOR, BERKE TODI MANE, KALIYA VILLAGE, GEREUKATTE POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK, DK MANGALORE-574217. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA R1 AND R2; SRI. RAKSHITH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R6 & R8 TO R11) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09.01.25 IN NO. TRS. CR. 103/24-25 PASSED BY THE R1 AS PER ANNX-A SO FAR AS PETITIONER AS CONCERNED. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners are the residents of Belthangady Taluk, and they have applied to be part of the Management Committee of Sri Durga Parameswari Temple, Nyayatharpu village, Belthangady Taluk, Dakshina Kannada. The petitioners are aggrieved by the first respondent's order dated 09.01.2025 [Annexure-A] under Section 25 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 [for short, 'the Act']. The petitioners' grievance with this order is premised in a narrow compass, and to buttress the same, they rely upon Annexures - C and D. 2. Mr. B. S. Sachin, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that a political party functionary has forwarded a list of villagers to be - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 made a part of the Managing Committee on 18.12.2024 which is followed by a note dated 26.12.2024 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada and that within the next fifteen [15] days, the first respondent has issued the impugned order incorporating the very nine private individuals herein [the private respondents in the present proceedings] as members of the Managing Committee. 3. Ms. Navya Shekhar, the learned Additional Government Advocate, supported by Mr. Rakshith Kumar, the learned counsel for the private respondents, submits that this Court may not interfere on the ground asserted on behalf of the petitioners because there is no reference to either the correspondence from the political functionary or the Hon'ble District Minister and it is an independent exercise of power by the first respondent following the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 procedure that is contemplated under Section 25 of the Act. 4. On perusal of Annexure-C, Annexure-D and the impugned order as per Annexure-A, this Court is not persuaded to accept this defense, and it is not just because the same persons figure in all the three but also because of the interval within which the impugned order is issued. This Court has no hesitation in holding that the first respondent's order is arbitrary and without an independent assessment which must be the cornerstone of a decision under Section 25 of the Act. Therefore, there has to be an interference, and the question which survives for consideration is what should be the operative order with an interim arrangement. 5. The learned counsels for the parties and the learned Additional Government Advocate are heard. The consequence of this Court interfering with - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 Annexure-A would result in a vacuum where there has to be an administrator or an alternative arrangement made. The private respondents have taken charge and have been managing the affairs of the temple for the last seven months. This Court is of the view that this arrangement need not be disturbed but the first respondent must process the application already received, follow the due procedure contemplated under Section 25 of the Act and take a decision in a time bound manner lest the private respondents continue notwithstanding their appointment being quashed by this Court. Hence, the following: ORDER [A] The petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 09.01.2025 [Annexure-A] is quashed. The private respondents, who manage the managing committee of the temple, shall continue to manage the day- to-day affairs of the temple without taking - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29428 WP No. 8334 of 2025 any decision which has a major financial implication. [B] The first respondent shall scrutinize the applications already filed and process the applications as contemplated under Section 25 of the Act and constitute a fresh committee within three [3] months from today. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 24