- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:538 WP No. 31589 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 31589 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. JAGANNATHA U S/O.NARAYAN POOJARY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O UJIRKODI, YENEKALLU POST, SULLIA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA 574 238 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARISH N.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, BUNDER, MANGALURU 575 001. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KUKKE SRI SUBRAHMANYA TEMPLE, SUBRAHMANYA, KADABA TALUK, Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:538 WP No. 31589 of 2025 DAKSHINA KANNADA 574 238. 4. THE TAHSILDAR KADABA TALUK KADABA-SUBRAHMANYA ROAD, KADABA, DAKSHINA KANNADA 574 221. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA FOR R1, R2 & R4 SRI.VIKRAMN H BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. VAISHALI HEGDE., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 28.12.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PRODUCED AT ANNX-B AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 28.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANX-B AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking to quash the impugned notice at Annexure-A dated 28.12.2024 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada District, calling upon the petitioner to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.5,51,520/- and appropriate action is taken pursuant to the orders passed by the competent - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:538 WP No. 31589 of 2025 authority under the provisions of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997. 2. It is clear from the facts narrated in the writ petition that the petitioner has not raised a challenge to the order passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the said Act. It would be a futile exercise on the part of the petitioner to seek quashment of the impugned notice at Annexure-A issued by the Deputy Commissioner, who is the competent authority to recover the arrears of rent in terms of the orders passed by the competent authority. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that during the course of these proceedings the petitioner has deposited Rs.1,00,000/- with the respondent temple. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty may be reserved to the petitioner to raise a challenge to the order passed by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:538 WP No. 31589 of 2025 Deputy Commissioner and competent authority while also seeking protection to the petitioner for a reasonable period to enable the petitioner to raise a challenge to the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to raise a challenge to the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and competent authority. However, the respondents No.2 and 3 are hereby directed not to precipitate the matter any further against the petitioner for a period of three weeks to enable the petitioner to approach the appellate authority to raise a challenge to the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and competent authority and seek appropriate interim orders. All contentions are left open. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL