- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 23117 OF 2025 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: SMT. MANORAMA S SHETTY AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, W/O. B. SHEKARA SHETTY, R/AT ABHINETRI HOUSE, KUNJAL HOUSE, BRAHMAVARA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 213. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A. ABHINAV RAMANAND., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIJAY KRISHNA BHAT. M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, H R I AND CE DEPARTMENT, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENT, ALUR VENKATARAO ROAD, CHAMARAJAPET, BENGALURU 560 018. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HRI AND CE DEPARTMENT, UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI 576 101. 4. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI 576 101. 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HRI AND CE DEPARTMENT, UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI 576 101. 6. SRI. SUDHAKARA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O. BHOJAGOWDA R/AT. NADU ACTOLI, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 7. SRI VARADARAJA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O. ANNAPPA, R/AT. KULAL, MELBANDI MUTT, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 112. 8. SRI. HARISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O. SUNDARKUMAR, R/AT. BELLARE HOUSE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 9. SRI. SUDARSHAN HEGDE, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O. VITTALA HEGDE, R/AT. ACTOLI HOUSE, NALU VILLAGE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT 576 112. 10. SRI. MANJUNATH KULAL, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O. JAYARAM KULAL, R/AT. MULLADU BAILUMANE, NADALU VILLAGE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 11. SRI. NAGARAJA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O. RAMA HARIJANA, R/AT. BAILUMANE, NANDALU, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 NALU VILLAGE, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 112. 12. SRI. DHEERAJ HEGDE, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, S/O. GANGADHARA HEGDE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 13. SRI. VIJAYKUMAR SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O. BHOJA SHETTY, R/AT. VISHWAN KRUPA, NADPALU VILLAGE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 14. SRI. NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O LINGAPPA NAYAK, NADPALU VILLAGE, SEETANADI POST, HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. 15. SRI. MAHESH NAIK, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O. NAGAPPA NAIK, R/AT HURULLI KUMBLI, NADPALU VILLAGE, SEETANADI POST, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 HEBRI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 112. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.RAVINDRANATH ., AGA FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. NATARAJ BALLAL., ADVOCATE FOR R6 TO R15) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO(A) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE GOVERNMENT ORDER BEARING NO.KUME-32-MUAB. 2025 DATED 04.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AT ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM NO.HRICE- ADMOADM8/194/2023/E-1191548 DATED 26.05.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AT ANNEXURES - B; B) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.02.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN PROCEEDING NO.HRICE- ADM0ADM8/194/2023/E-1191548 VIDE ANNEXURE- S; C) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 TO ACCOUNT FOR THE SEIZED HUNDIS AND REFUND THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF HUNDI - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 COLLECTION TO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHREE DURGA PARAMESHWARI TEMPLE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 04.06.2025 as per Annexure-A. The first respondent has issued this order declaring Shree Durga Parameshwari Temple, Nandala, Nadpalu Village, Hebri Taluk, Udupi District - a declared institution in exercise of jurisdiction under Sections 42 and 43 of the Karnataka Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 [for short, 'the Act']. The second respondent, after the impugned order dated 04.06.2025, has issued the Official Memorandum dated 26.06.2025 [Annexure-B] appointing the Executive Officer and such appointment is in exercise of the powers under - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 Section 45 of the Act. The petitioner has impugned even this Memorandum dated 26.06.2025. 2. The petitioner contends that the Temple is a private institution managed by the petitioner and that her right stands vindicated with a decree in the year 1949 as also the orders in a suit in O.S.No.122/2022 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Karkala. The petitioner asserts that if the proceedings could have been initiated under Section 42 of the Act, it should have been with a show cause notice issued by the Commissioner [the second respondent] and not by the Assistant Commissioner [the fifth respondent]. Sri A. Abhinav Ramanand, the learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration, submits that [a] the fifth respondent has issued a show cause notice assuming jurisdiction contrary to the statutory provision alleging there is financial mismanagement though all the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 Books of Accounts are being maintained and the petitioner has filed his response to the show cause notice; [b] the Assistant Commissioner has filed a report after an opportunity, which is accepted by the second respondent, resulting in the first respondent's order dated 04.06.2025. The learned counsel submits that non-application of mind is writ large and that the first respondent has referred to the facts that are not relevant to the present case. 3. Sri Nataraj Ballal, the learned counsel who is on record for the private respondents, and Sri.B.Ravindranath, the learned Additional Government Advocate, are heard in the light of these circumstances and the report is placed on record by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner after this Court's interim order dated 22.01.2026. This Court - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 has called upon for a report from the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner on the circumstances in which the Executive Officer has called for quotations to organize religious events scheduled to be held between 19th and 22nd February 2026. The Executive Officer, notwithstanding an order for report from the Deputy Commissioner, has filed a report stating that the quotation is called to ensure transparency in the conduct of religious activities. 4. Be that as it may, the outcome on the petitioner's grievance with the order dated 04.06.2025 and the Memorandum 26.06.2025 must turn on the permissibility of the proceedings based on a show cause notice that is issued by the Assistant Commissioner [the fifth respondent]. The provisions of Section 43 of the Act are categorical, and it reads as under: "(1) xxxxx (2) Such notice shall state the reasons for the action proposed and specify a - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 reasonable time, not being less than one month from the date of issue of the notice, for showing such cause. (3) xxxxx (4) xxxxx (5) xxxxx (6) Where objections are received within the time so specified or extended, the Commissioner may authorise any officer subordinate to him to hold an enquiry into the objections in the manner prescribed who shall after giving the Manager or any person having interest an opportunity of being heard submit his enquiry report to the Commissioner as to whether or not the Institution should be declared to be subject to the provisions of this Chapter." The Commissioner must issue the notice and after the objections are filed, the Commissioner may authorise any officer subordinate to him to hold an enquiry and the officer so authorized must extend opportunity. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 5. It follows from the Scheme that the Commissioner, even before initiating proceedings, must be satisfied that there is a cause for initiation of the proceedings. This exercise must be by the Commissioner unless there is some delegation as is permissible in law and nothing is brought on record to justify such delegation. The entire proceedings inarguably is commenced with a show cause notice issued not by the Commissioner but by the Assistant Commissioner and this affords reasonable justification for interference. 6. The next question is should this Court interfere to quash the impugned order and the Official Memorandum closing the proceedings. This Court is of the considered view that the quashing cannot close the proceedings and it should be open to the Commissioner, if circumstances justify, to initiate proceedings and to ensure its culmination in accordance with the procedure that is contemplated - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 under Section 43 of the Act before there is a decision to declare the institution. The final question that should be answered by the Court is should there be any impediment for the petitioner to organise the event that is scheduled to be held between 19th and 22nd of February 2026. The entire proceedings will be recommenced if the Commissioner is satisfied about the reasons therefor and until then the petitioner cannot be shackled and the petitioner must be put on terms that are reasonable. Sri Abhinav Ramanand is categorical that the petitioner does not propose to receive any contributions from the public and the petitioner would conduct the event herself. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [A] The petition is allowed quashing the impugned order dated 04.06.2025 [Annexure- A] and the Official Memorandum dated 26.06.2025 [Annexure-B] but without prejudice to the Commissioner [the second - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6733 WP No. 23117 of 2025 respondent] to initiate proceedings afresh in accordance with the procedure contemplated under Section 43 of the Act. [B] The petitioner will be at liberty to organise and oversee the event that is scheduled to be held between 19th and 22nd February 2026 but on the condition that she shall ensure that the Books of Accounts are maintained and filed as is required in law and that she shall not receive any contribution whatsoever from the public. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA