Karnataka High Court
Sri Devegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 2 July, 2019
Author: B.Veerappa
Bench: B. Veerappa
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
WRIT PETITION NO.47493/2014 (GM-KSR)
BETWEEN:
1.SRI DEVEGOWDA
S/O KALEGOWDA
AGED 63 YEARS
RESIDING AT DEVEGOWDANA DODDI
CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MENASIGERE POST, MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 422
2.SRI JAVAREGOWDA
S/O DODDEGOWDA
AGED 70 YEARS
RESIDING AT DEVEGOWDANA DODDI
CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MENASIGERE POST, MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 422
3.SRI BASAVARAJU
S/O BASAVEGWODA
AGED 50 YEARS
KARKALLI VILLAGE
RESIDING AT DEVEGOWDANA DODDI
CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MENASIGERE POST, MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 422
ALL ARE MEMBERS/DIRECTORS OF EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE
-2-
M/S BASAVESHWARA SWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKAHALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571422 ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SUNIL S. RAO FOR SRI T. SESHAGIRI RAO ADVS.)
AND:
1.STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU- 560003
2.THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES
THE DEPARTMENT OF ASSOCIATION & SOCIETIES
MANDYA
MANDYA DISTRICT-571422
3.SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCITIES
REGISTRATION ACT 1960
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT KARKALLI
CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT -571422
BY ITS SECRETARY T. NINGAIAH
4.SRI THAMMANNA
S/O BASAVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
ALLEGED PRESIDENT
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
5.SRI SANNEGOWDA
S/O LATE KEMPASIDDEGOWDA
-3-
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
VICE PRESIDENT
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
6.SRI T NINGAIAH
S/O THAMMANNAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
SECRETARY
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
7.SRI B MADHU
S/O BASAVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
JOINT SECRETARY
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
8.SRI B NATARAJU
S/O BHEEMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
TREASURER
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT571422
9.SRI BASAPPA
S/O BASAPPA @ MAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
MEMBER
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
-4-
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
10.SRI PUTTASWAMY
S/O MALACHARI
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
MEMBER
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
11.SRI BORAIAH
S/O HOTTE KALAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
MEMBER
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
12.SRI DEVEGOWDA
S/O GANG GUDUGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
MEMBER
SRI BASAVESHWARASWAMY ABHIVRIDDI SAMITHI
KARKALLI, CHIKKARASANAKERE HOBLI
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
13.THE TAHSILDAR
MADDUR TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571422
14.THE COMMISSIONER
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE
ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT
MALAI MAHADESHWARA VAARTHA BHAVANA
-5-
3RD FLOOR, ALURU VENKATA RAO ROAD
CHAMARAJAPETE
BENGALURU 560018 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, HCGP FOR R1,2,13 & 14
SRI H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADV. FOR R3 TO 12)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.6.2014 PASSED
BY THE R-2 VIDE ANN-A; HOLD AND DECLARE THAT IN
VIEW OF THE NOTIFICATION VIDE ANN-B, i.e. G.O. DATED
29.9.2012, SRI BASAVESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE
SITUATED AT KARAKAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHIKKARASINAKERE HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA
DISTRICT IS A HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE
INSTITUTION BELONGING TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
KARNATAKA IN TERMS OF ANN-B. DIRECT THE R-14 TO
APPOINT NECESSARY COMMITTEE TO MANAGE THE
AFFAIRS OF THE TEMPLE. DIRECT THE R-2 TO INITIATE
FURTHER ACTION UNDER SEC. 26 OF THE KARNATAKA
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT AND IMPLEMENT THE
ORDER DATED NIL, PASSED BY THE R-2 IN ANN-J ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri Sunil S. Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the subsequent development, prayer 'a', 'b' and 'e' would not survive for consideration. The said submission is placed on -6- record. Hence, the writ petition insofar as prayers 'a', 'b' and 'e' is dismissed as not pressed.
2. The petitioners who are alleged trustees of Sri Basaveshwara Swamy temple situated at Karakahalli village, Chikkarasinakere Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District are before this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.14- Commissioner, Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments Department to appoint necessary Committee to manage the affairs of the Temple and for directing respondent No.2 to initiate further action under Section 26 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act and implement the order dated nil passed by the respondent No.2 as per annexure-J (enquiry report).
3. It is the case of the petitioners that respondent No.3-Society was registered in the office -7- of the Registrar of Societies, Mandya, on 10.12.2007. Subsequent to the formation of the society, the erstwhile President of the society Sri Basavegowda died on 22.12.2010, since he was not keeping well his son assumed the chair of the President for the Society even without being a member of the same and thereafter indulged himself in the society in large scale misappropriation. The petitioners herein filed alleged complaint to respondent No.2 against the misdeeds of respondent No.3-Society including misappropriation and siphoning of funds in the year 2011. Respondent No.2 issued a show cause notice to respondent No.3-Society and respondent No.3-Society replied to the said notice on 08.11.2011. Thereafter respondent No.2 issued a notice to the respondent No.3-Society for inspection and conveninig a meeting to see whether an inquiry should be initiated under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. -8- Thereafter the second respondent after holding enquiry found serious misappropriation of temple funds, diversion of temple funds and further the funds of the temple had been siphoned off to a tune of more than Rupees one and half Crores.
4. Thereafter Sri Karakahalli Basaveshwara Swamy Temple situated at Karakahalli Village, C.A.Kere Hobli, Maddur taluk, Mandy district was notified as a Muzarai Temple on 29.09.2012. On the enquiry, upon the recommendations of the enquiry officer, the State Government resolved to appoint an Administrator to the temple as per annexure-K. Thereafter, respondent No.3- Society filed writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.23254/2013 challenging the enquiry report dated 29.02.2012 and the writ petition came to be disposed of directing the second respondent-Registrar and the Administrator of the third respondent-Society, to conduct election to the -9- Government with expedition and before 31.12.2014 and hand over the administration of the third respondent-society to the elected committee of management etc.
5. Respondent No.14 issued a requisition to the Deputy Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Mandya District not to hold elections as the said society was constituted for managing the temple and later on the temple was taken over by the Muzarai Department and holding elections would be improper. But respondent No.13 had passed an order to hold elections and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court for the relief sought for.
6. The State Government filed statement of objections to the writ petition and would curiously stated in para 11 that "this respondent absolutely has no objection to allow the writ and grant the relief
- 10 -
sought by the petitioners since the same is also justifiable and also helpful to the respondent to discharge the legitimate duty and as well as protect the interest of public and Sri Basaveshwara Temple of Karkahalli Village of C.A. Kere Hobli, Maddur Taluk". Subsequently additional statement of objections was also filed on 21.01.2015. It has stated that the temple is Muzarai temple, which falls under 'C' category in view of section 69[B] of Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowment Act and no person or Society can meddle with the income or the property of the Temple. The claim of the respondents that the Bull belongs to them is incorrect. The bull is the property of the temple which is notified under the Act and falls under 'C' category and further contended that devotees who come to the temple and give their offerings to the temple do not register themselves and do not disclose what offerings are given to the temple.
- 11 -
The respondents have not maintained the register with regard to the offerings given by the devotees and only in special circumstances a receipt is given to the devotees and it is taken to account. In respect of live stock which is offerings to the temple, are not registered. But still, the respondents try to keep note of the same which are brought to their notice. Similarly, the bull which is now in the possession of the temple was brought to the notice of the temple about 10 years back. Since then, the bull is in the temple premises and is taken care by the temple Authorities. Therefore, he sought to dispose of the writ petition taking note of the above statement of objections.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
8. Sri Sunil S. Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the writ
- 12 -
petition has contended that respondent No.3-Society is neither a Society nor a Trust which has been constituted by the Government of Muzarai Department for the purpose of overseeing the affairs of the temple He would further contend that respondent No.3- Society has been wrongfully proclaiming in public and even before this Court that Society was constituted only to oversee the affairs of the temple . Admittedly the temple is notified to the Muzarai department as per annexure-B on 29.09.2012.
9. He further contend that, it is the duty of first respondent-State Government and jurisdictional Tahsildar to take proper steps to ensure proper maintenance of the temple and to take appropriate action to avoid misappropriation of funds. The enquiry under Section 25 of the Act has been initiated and enquiry officer has submitted the report as per annexure-J, holding that all the charges against the
- 13 -
committee have been proved for misappropriation of funds. Inspite of the same, till today, no further action is initiated by the authorities. He fairly submits that the Authorities have to take strict action against those who are involved in misappropriation of funds belonging to temple including the petitioners, if any. Therefore, he sought to allow the writ petition.
10. Per contra, Sri S.Chandrashekaraiah, learned HCGP reiterating the averments made in the statement of objections, submits that the Tahsildar who is the jurisdictional Muzarai Officer and respondent No.1-State Government will take appropriate action in accordance with law on the basis of the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer. The said submission is placed on record.
11. Sri. H.C. Shivaramu, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.3 to 12 who are
- 14 -
erstwhile trustees who are not been heard in the matter before enquiry and contended that there is no election conducted to the respondent No.3 -Society. Therefore he submits that it is for the respondent- No.1-State Government, Muzarai Officer to form trust to manage entire affairs of the temple and to take appropriate action to conduct elections in accordance with law. Therefore, he sought to dismiss the writ petition.
12. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is the specific case of the petitioners that respondent No.3 is neither a Society nor a Trust which has been constituted by the Government or Muzarai Department. Therefore, respondent No.3 cannot be allowed to manage the day to day affairs of the temple. As Sri Basaveshwara swamy temple, Karakahalli village comes under the purview of the Muzarai department and once it is declared and
- 15 -
notified as Muzarai temple as long back on 29.09.2012, the Tahsildar who is Muzarai Officer has to take necessary steps after getting proper information from the Muzarai Department-respondent No.1-State Government to constitute proper trust or it is bounden duty of the State Government to take proper steps to ensure the smooth functioning of the temple and to ensure that the alleged members of respondent No.3-Society or alleged trustees including the petitioners should not misuse or misappropriate the funds belonging to the temple.
13. It is also relevant to note at this stage, that respondent No.1-State Government while filing statement of objections has stated that it has no objections to allow the writ petition and grant the relief as sought by the petitioners. The same is justifiable and also helpful to the respondents to discharge their legitimate duty as well as protect the
- 16 -
interest of large public and Sri Basaveshwara swamy temple, Karakahalli village Mandya Taluk. This clearly indicates that the Tahsildar has not discharged his duties as a responsible officer of the Taluk and he cannot depute his responsibilities upon the petitioners. It is the duty of Tahsildar to protect Muzarai temples under the provisions of Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments Act and to take proper action to improve the temples.
14. It is also not in dispute, the State Government has appointed enquiry officer under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act 1960, and enquiry officer after holding enquiry submitted the report as per annexure-J dated Nil holding that all the 9 charges against the executive committee are proved and misappropriation of funds belonging to the temple also have been proved, but till today the concerned Registrar of Societies or respondent No.1-
- 17 -
State Government has not initiated any action in terms of the Act and ensure the smooth functioning of the temple.
15. It is also stated by Sri H.C. Shivaramu, learned counsel, on instructions that enquiry report Annexure-B has been challenged by respondents. Be that as it may, once the temple is notified as Muzarai temple under Section 25 of Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, it is the duty of the respondent No.1-State Government or Tahsildar to ensure the smooth functioning of the temple and to take appropriate action in accordance with law and in the instant case the same has not been done. Though the matter has been pending before this Court, no interim order was granted.
16. In view of the above, respondents No.13 and 14 are hereby directed to take appropriate action
- 18 -
in accordance with the provisions of Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 and also implement annexure-J enquiry report, if there are no interim orders of stay of further proceedings of annexure-J by any other courts and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Respondent No.1-State Government shall ensure the smooth functioning of the day to day affairs of the temple by directing all the concerned authorities and Tahsildar in accordance with law.
Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE HR