- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6282 OF 2025 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: SRI.T. RAMESH S/O. LATE SRI. THIMMALAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. NO.1, 7TH MODAL KUTEERA, MAHADESHWARA HILL, HANURU TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT 571490. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. SUBRAMANYA BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MUNIMANJU H.M..,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR KARNATAKA HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, MINTO ANJANEYA BHAVANA, ALURU VENKATA RAO ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE560 018. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 2. THE SECRETARY, SHRI. MALE MAHADESWARA SWAMY KSHETHRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, HANURU TALUK, CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT - 571490. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI., AGA FOR R1; SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. ADM7/RP26/ 2023-24 DATED 26.12.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT THE COMMISSIONER FOR KARNATAKA HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, AT BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner's grievance is with the first respondent's order dated 26.12.2024 [Annexure-A] under the provisions of Section 63[1] of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 [for short 'the Act']. The petitioner has urged multiple grounds as against the first respondent's order contending that the petitioner would be entitled to subsistence allowance even if he could have been kept under suspension before termination. 2. This Court must record that the petitioner alleges lack of application of mind and that the impugned order is at the instance of the second respondent. This Court, on 19.09.2025, has called for the first respondent's presence observing that the first respondent must have reasoned the impugned order after acquainting himself with the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 circumstances of the case taking on record certain submissions on behalf of the first respondent. 3. The incumbent first respondent is present, and on his instructions, Smt Saritha Kulkarni submits that for complete adjudication, this Court may consider interfering with the impugned order dated 26.12.2024 and restoring the proceedings for due consideration, especially with the petitioner now being admitted to subsistence allowance in terms of the details placed on record today. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the second respondent are heard, and they seek to elaborate on the circumstances that the petitioner and the second respondent would rely upon. 4. However, this Court is of the view that for a comprehensive decision without further precipitation, there must be interference with the impugned order and the proceedings restored for due consideration calling upon the first respondent to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 extend another opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Hence the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed in part. [b] The first respondent's order dated 26.12.2024 [Annexure-A] is quashed restoring the proceedings for due consideration. [c] The petitioner shall appear without further notice before the first respondent on 02.03.2026 and the first respondent shall dispose of the appeal on merits after due opportunity to the petitioner and the second respondent's representative. It is needless to observe that all questions are left open to be duly considered by the first respondent. [d] It is open to the petitioner to make an application with the first - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8411 WP No. 6282 of 2025 respondent for payment of subsistence allowance during the pendency of the appeal and that the first respondent shall consider the same in the event the disposal of the appeal is delayed. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-