Karnataka High Court
Sri Niranjan Ganig N vs State Of Karnataka on 2 February, 2023
Author: M. Nagaprasanna
Bench: M. Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.22090 OF 2022 (GM - R/C)
C/W
WRIT PETITION No.15273 OF 2022 (GM - R/C)
WRIT PETITION No.21240 OF 2022 (GM - R/C)
WRIT PETITION No.22515 OF 2022 (GM - R/C)
IN WRIT PETITION No.22090 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SRI V.MUNICHETTY
S/O LATE HONNAPPA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.83/2, 1ST MAIN ROAD
GOVINDARAJA NAGAR
OPP. RAHEJA PARK APARTMENT
BENGALURU - 560 040
2. SRI SHANKAR B.C.
S/O LATE B.A.CHIKKANNAIAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.523, 10TH CROSS
5TH MAIN, VINAYAKA LAYOUT
NAGARABHAVI II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 072.
3. SRI NAGARAJ G.,
S/O SRI GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
2
R/A NO.286, 6TH CROSS
VINAYAKA NAGAR
M.S.PALYA
VIDYARANYAPURA POST
BENGALURU - 560 097.
4. SMT. PREMA VENKATESH
W/O SRI VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.1004/5, .
3RD CROSS ROAD
E - BLOCK
RAJAJINAGAR II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 010.
5. SRI SRINATH K.V.,
S/O SRI VENKATARAMAIAH SETTY K.N.,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.53,
GANGADHAR RESIDENCY
FLAT NO.104, 1ST FLOOR
SUBBAIAH GARDEN
ADUGODI
BENGALURU - 560 032.
6. SRI KESHAV KUMAR
S/O SRI NARAYANA PRASAD
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.F-6,
SRI SAI PARADISE
1ST CROSS, NEAR RAMAIAH CITY
J.P.NAGAR, 7TH PHASE
BENGALURU - 560 076.
7. SRI K.A.VENKATESH
S/O SRI APPAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.1004/5,
3
3RD CROSS ROAD
E-BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 010.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADVOCATE FOR
SRI KRISHNA MURTHY V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
(MUJARAI)
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT(MUJARAI)
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
THE RELIGIOUS AND
CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
OPPOSITE TO MINTO HOSPITAL
CHAMARAJPET
BENGALURU - 560 019.
4. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY
CHARITIES
FORT, BENGALURU - 560 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
4
5. SRI MOHAN MURTHY V.,
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.120, 5TH CROSS
SHASHTRINAGAR
BENGALURU-70.
6. SRI P.G.VIJAYKUMAR
S/O LATE P.V.GOPALAKRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.33, 6TH CROSS
VARASIDDINAGAR
NEAR JAIN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
ANDRAHALLI MAIN ROAD
PEENYA, BENGALURU - 58.
7. SRI SHANKAR V.,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.301,
SRI RAM ADITHYA APARTMENTS
4TH CROSS
NAIDU LAYOUT AREHALLI
BANASHANKARI III STAGE
BENGALURU - 85.
8. SRI D.PRABHAKAR
S/O LATE DASANNA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.202, FLAT NO.T-3
4TH FLOOR, SWISS COMPLEX
NO.33/61, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 1.
9. SMT.JYOTHI KUMAR
W/O SRI B.M.RAMESH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
RESIDING AT SRIKARA, NO.5,
2ND MAIN ROAD
5
TATA SILK FARM
BASAVANAGUDI
BENGALURU - 4.
10 . SRI S.SURESH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.55, 4TH CROSS
KRISHNAMURHTY NAGAR
TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD
DRC POST
BENGALURU - 29.
11 . SMT.ROOPA V.,
W/O SRI VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.45, FLAT NO.202
B.K.NAGAR, 2ND MAIN ROAD
LIC COLONY
YESHWANTHPURA
BENGALURU - 52.
12 . SRI UDAYA GARADUCHAR
S/O SRI GARADUCHAR
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
OFFICE AT NEW K.R.ROAD
BASAVANAGUDI
BENGALURU - 4.
13 . DR.N.SANJEEVREDDY
S/O SRI NARASIMHAREDDY
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.205,
SRI LALITHA KRUPA
A BLOCK, 14TH MAIN ROAD
SUBRAMANYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 21.
6
14 . SMT. SHOBHA H.G.,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.114, 1ST FLOOR
SADHANA MUSIC
HAYAVADANA RAO ROAD
HAVIPURAM LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 19.
15 . SRI A.KEMPANA SHETTY
S/O LATE ARASAPPA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.425, KAVERI NAGAR
R T NAGAR
BENGALURU - 32.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.KRISHNA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
R-4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED
SRI A.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R-5, R-7, R-8,
R-9; SRI M.S.JITHENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1) ISSUE A
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS QUASHING THE
ORDER DATED 12.09.2022 IN NO KUME 36 MUSARA 2022,
BENGALURU, PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT SO FAR AS
APPOINTING THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE FOURTH
RESPONDENT IN APPOINTING THE RESPONDENT NO 5 TO 9 AND
11 TO 15 RESPECTIVELY ANNEXURE B AND ETC.,
7
IN WRIT PETITION No.15273 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SRI V.MUNICHETTY
S/O LATE HONNAPPA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT NO.83/2
1ST MAIN ROAD
GOVINDARAJA NAGAR
OPP.RAHEJA PARK APARTMENT
BENGALURU - 560 040.
2. SRI SHANKAR B.C.,
S/O LATE B.A.CHIKKANNAIAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.523
10TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN,
VINAYAKA LAYOUT
NAGARBHAVI II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 072.
3. SRI NAGARAJU G.M.,
S/O SRI GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NO.286, 6TH CROSS
VINAYAKA NAGAR
M.S.PALYA
VIDYARANYAPURA POST
BENGALURU - 560 097.
4. SMT.PREMA VENKATESH
W/O SRI VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO. 1004/5
3RD CROSS ROAD, E-BLOCK
RAJAJINAGAR II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 010.
8
5. SRI SRINATH K.V.,
S/O SRI VENKATARAMANAIAH SETTY K.N.,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NO.53
GANGADHAR RESIDENCY
FLAT NO.104, 1ST FLOOR
SUBBAIAH GARDEN
ADUGODI
BENGALURU - 560 032.
6. SRI KESHAV KUMAR
S/O SRI NARAYANA PRASAD
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT NO.F6
SRI SAI PARADISE
1ST CROSS
NEAR RAMAIAH CITY
J.P.NAGAR, 7TH PHASE
BENGALURU - 560 076.
7. SRI K.N.VENKATESH
S/O SRI APPAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.1004/5
3RD CROSS ROAD
E-BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
II STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 010.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADVOCATE FOR
SRI KRISHNA MURTHY V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
9
(MUJARAI)
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
THE UNDER SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT (MUJARAI)
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
THE RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE
ENDOWMENTS
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
OPPOSITE TO MINTO HOSPITAL
CHAMRAJPET
BENGALURU - 560 019.
4. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY CHARITIES
REGISTERED UNDER TRUST DEED
FORT, BENGALURU - 560 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.KRISHNA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
R-4 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DTD 20.05.2021 IN NO.KUME 18 MUSEV 2020,
BENGALURU, PASSED BY THE R-2 SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO
MODIFYING RULE-4(b) AND RULE 4A(b)(f) AND (j), BY MODIFYING
THE SUB-RULE 4 OF THE RULES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF THE
SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY CHARITIES, FORT, BENGALURU
CITY I.E., THE R-4 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.,
10
IN WRIT PETITION No.21240 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI NIRANJAN GANIG N.,
S/O NAGARAJ GUPTA J.V.,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/A NO.728, 2ND MAIN
8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU - 560 095.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI N.SURESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT(MUZARAI)
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT(MUZARAI)
NO.536, 2ND GATE 5TH FLOOR
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
THE RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
2ND AND 3RD FLOOR
ALURU VENKATA RAO ROAD
CHAMARAJAPETE
BENGALURU - 560 018.
4. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY CHARITIES
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
11
FORT, BENGALURU - 560 002.
5. SRI MOHAN MURTHY
S/O LATE SRI H.M.VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
R/A NO.120, 5TH CROSS
SHASTRINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 070.
6. SRI P.G.VIJAYAKUMAR
MAJOR
R/AT NO.33, 6TH CROSS
VARASIDDHINAGARA
NEAR JAIN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
ADARAHALLI MAIN ROAD
PEENYA 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 058.
7. SRI SHANKAR V.,
MAJOR
R/A H-301
SRIRAMA ADITYA APARTMENTS
4TH CROSS, NAIDU LAYOUT
AREHALLI
BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 050.
8. SRI D.PRABHAKAR
MAJOR
R/AT NO.202, PLOT NO.T-3
4TH FLOOR, SWISS COMPLEX
NO.33/61, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
9. SMT.JYOTHI KUMAR
MAJOR
R/AT SRIKARA
NO.5, 2ND MAIN ROAD
TATA SILK FARM
12
BASAVANAGUDI
BENGALURU - 560 004.
10 . SRI SURESH
MAJOR
R/A NO.55, 4TH CROSS
KRISHNAMURTHYNAGAR
TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD
D.R.C. POST
BENGALURU - 560 029.
11 . SMT.ROOPA V.,
MAJOR
R/A NO.45, FLAT NO.202
B.K.NAGARA
2ND MAIN ROAD
LIC COLONY
YESHWANTHPURA
BENGALURU - 560 054.
12 . SRI B.G.UDAY
(PRESENT MLA, CHIKKA PETE CONSTITUENCY)
S/O SRI B.N.GARUDACHAR
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
R/AT NO.727/1
46TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 8TH BLOCK
BENGALURU - 560 082.
13 . SRI SANJEEV REDDY
S/O LATE NARASIMHAREDDY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO.205
SRI LALITHA KRUPA
'A' BLOCK, 14TH MAIN
SUBRAMANYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 021.
14 . SMT.SHOBHA H.G.,
13
MAJOR
R/AT NO.114, 1ST FLOOR
SADHANA MUSIC
HAYAVADANA RAO ROAD
GAVIPURAM LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 019.
15 . SRI A.KEMPANANNA SHETTY
S/O LATE ARASAPPA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/A NO.425, KAVERINAGAR
R.T.NAGAR POST
BENGALURU - 560 032.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.KRISHNA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI A.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R-5, R-7 TO R-9;
SRI M.S.JITHENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-6;
SRI SATHISH K.R., ADVOCATE FOR R-15)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DTD 12.09.2022 IN NO.KUME 36 MUSEV 2022,
BENGALURU, PASSED BY THE R2 SO FAR AS APPOINTING THE
MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THE R4 IN APPOINTING THE R5 TO 9
AND 11 TO 15 RESPECTIVELY ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
IN WRIT PETITION No.22515 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI. RAJGOPAL B.M.
S/O MUNISWAMMANNA B.G.,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT NO.G1277, 8TH CROSS ROAD
1ST STAGE, JP NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 026.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI S.B.TOTAD, ADVOCATE)
14
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT (MUZARAI)
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT (MUZARAI)
NO. 536, 2ND GATE, 5TH FLOOR
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
THE RELIGIOUS AND
CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
2ND AND 3RD FLOOR
ALURU VENKATA RAO ROAD
CHAMARAJAPETE
BENGALURU - 560 018.
4. SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHASWAMY CHARITIES
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
FORT, BENGALURU - 560 002.
5. SRI SURESH
MAJOR
R/AT NO.55, 4TH CROSS
KRISHNAMURTHYNAGAR
TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD
D.R.C POST
BENGALURU - 560 029.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.KRISHNA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
SRI A.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R5)
15
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DTD:23.09.2022 IN NO.KUME 36 MUSEV 2022, BENGALURU
PASSED BY THE R2 IN REMOVING THE PETITIONER FROM THE
MEMBERSHIP OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF THE R4 AT
ANNEXURE-H.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 30.01.2023, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question order dated 12-09-2022 passed by the 2nd respondent/State appointing Managing Committee of the 4th respondent insofar as it is pertaining to appointment of respondents 5 to 9 and 11 to 15 and have sought quashment of direction dated 23-09-2022 with regard to the corrigendum issued to the order dated 12-09-2022 insofar as it appoints Members to the 4th respondent/ Sri Lakshmi Narasimhaswamy Charities, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trust' for short) and have further sought setting aside order dated 20-05-2021 passed by the 2nd respondent modifying the Rules and Bye-laws of the Trust and further sought a consequential direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to declare the 16 action of the respondents as illegal. All the other petitions also raise the very same question and challenge the very same order and the very same impugned proceedings. These petitions are therefore taken up together and considered by this common order. For the sake of convenience, facts in W.P.No.22090 of 2022 are noticed.
2. Heard Sri K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri B.V.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3, Sri A. Madhusudhan Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondents 5, 7 to 9 and Sri M.S.Jithendra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 in W.P.No.22090 of 2022; Sri K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri B.V.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.No.15273 of 2022; Sri N.Suresha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri B.V.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3, Sri A. Madhusudhan Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondents 5, 7 to 9, Sri M.S.Jithendra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 and Sri.Sathish.K.R., learned counsel 17 appearing for respondent No.15 in W.P.No.21240 of 2022; Sri.S.B.Totad, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri.B.V.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri.A.Madhusudhan Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 in W.P.No.22515 of 2022.
3. Brief facts that lead the petitioners to this Court in the subject petitions, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-
The petitioners claim to be the residents of the City of Bangalore and eligible to become Members of the Trust. The 4th respondent/Trust was established by Janopakari Doddanna Setty in the year 1920. On *23-06-1920 Janopakari Doddanna Setty executes a Will which comes to be executed by formation of the 4th respondent/Trust on 10-03-1937 for the purpose of administration of charities. Janopakari Doddanna Setty bequeathed, in terms of the aforesaid Will, all the properties for charitable purposes to promote moral, intellectual and industrial advancement of Vysya community in particular. There were several objectives of the Trust.
In pursuance of the aforesaid objectives of the Trust, Government of Karnataka constituted a committee of management for * Corrected vide Court order dated 02/03/2023.18
administration of charities in terms of the Will executed by Janopakari Doddanna Setty. The same continued up to 2014. The issue in the lis springs in the year 2014.
4. The Government notified the 4th respondent as an institution under Chapter VI of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1976 ('the Act' for short) invoking Section 23 of the said Act. In terms of the Government order, Rules were framed for the management of the Trust including appointment of the Committee of Management. In terms of the said Rules of management as framed on 28-07-2014, Government appointed a Committee consisting of 10 members as Members of the Managing Committee. The tenure of the said Committee was to be for a period of four years from 10-08-2018 to 9-08-2022. In the interregnum, without notifying any person of the community, it appears that modification to Rule 4 comes about on a recommendation made by the Managing Committee appointed on 10-08-2018.
19
5. On the basis of a communication of the 3rd respondent/Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments, the 2nd respondent passed an order modifying Rule 4 of the Rules. The petitioners claim to be unaware of the said amendment to the Rules. On the ground that the term of the Managing Committee appointed on 10-08-2018 was coming to an end on 9-08-2022, the petitioners submitted representations on 16-07-2022 and 19-07-2022 to appoint them to be the Members of the Trust to be constituted with effect from 10-08-2022. Respondents 1 to 3 on 12-09-2022 would pass the impugned order appointing respondents 5 to 9 and 11 to 15 as Members of the Trust without conducting any proceedings. It is alleged that it has been done on the basis of a note generated by the office of the Hon'ble Chief Minister.
6. The petitioners are claimed to have submitted applications under the Right to Information Act and secured certain information with regard to the appointment of respondents 5 to 9 and 11 to 15 to be at the dictate Hon'ble Chief Minister. On 23-09-2022 a corrigendum comes to be issued to the said order of appointment 20 dated 12-09-2022 by appointing the 10th respondent as a Member of the Trust. Therefore, the challenge is for appointment of respondents 5 to 15 as Members of the Trust. It is these actions that drive the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition. This Court in W.P.No.22090 of 2022, by order dated 15-11-2022 has granted an interim order of stay of the orders passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12-09-2022 and 23-09-2022, which reads as follows:
" ... ... ..
Learned counsel for petitioners takes this Court to the documents appended to the petition seeking to demonstrate that the Managing Committee is constituted only on the direction of the Hon'ble Chief Minister, which runs counter to the law laid down by this Court in the case of HARIKRISHNA PUNAROOR V. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in 2010 SCC OnLine Kar 5253.
In the light of this being the admitted position in terms of the documents, interim order as prayed for is granted till the next date of hearing.
... ... ..."
7. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend with vehemence that in terms of the Will and the Rules the constitution of the Committee of Management of the Trust 21 should be made known to all the persons belonging to the community and clandestinely the Committee of Management is appointed on the dictate of the Chief Minister. He would contend very constitution of the Committee of Management would run counter to Section 25 of the Act and the Rules. He would place reliance upon the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench rendered on identical circumstance in the case of HARIKRISHNA PUNAROOR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA and would seek grant of all the prayers that are sought in the petition.
8. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5, 7 to 9 and the learned counsel representing respondent No.6 would in unison refute the submissions of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners to contend that the Will and the Rules would empower the Government to appoint the Committee of Management of its choice to the Trust. The petitioners have no right to contend that they also are entitled to be considered for such appointment. The judgment on which the learned senior counsel places reliance upon is concerning a notified institution. The Trust had become a notified institution for a period 22 of four years and was later de-notified and, therefore, it is purely a private activity of a public charitable Trust and would submit that no fault can be found with the appointment of the respondents as Members of the said Trust. They would contend that the interim order is now coming in the way of the Trust which runs several institutions and salaries of the employees/staff and other statutory payments are held up due to the interim order. They would contend that there is grave urgency for a decision in the matter. It is, therefore, by consent of parties the matter was heard.
9. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record.
10. The afore-narrated facts, though not in dispute, would require a detailed narration. To trace the genesis, it is germane to notice establishment of the Trust. It is not in dispute that a Will comes to be registered by Janopakari Doddanna Setty on *23-06-1920 bequeathing all his properties for the benefit of the public, particularly the people of his community and the Will comes to be acted upon on 10-03-1937 by framing draft Rules. It would * Corrected vide Court order dated 02/03/2023. 23 suffice, if the date 10-03-1937 is taken as effective date of the Trust. The Muzrai Commissioner of the then Government of Mysore notifies the Rules of the Trust and the said Rules of the Trust, since then have stood the test of time by the appointment of persons to the Committee of Management from time to time. The petition appends Members of the Committee of Management from time to time in terms of the Rules. The Rules that are relevant for consideration of the lis would read as follows:
"1. NAME OF THE INSTITUTION:- The name of the Institution endowed by the late Janopakari Doddanna Setty under a Trust Deed dated 23rd June, 1920 and a Second Bequest dated 22nd April 1921 shall be the Sri Lakshminarasimha Swamy Charities, Bangalore City.
2. OBJECTS:- The objects of the Charities shall be as follows:-
i) Under the Trust Deed - To promote the moral, intellectual and industrial advancement of the peoples of the Jyothinagara Vysya Community in particular and that of the pupils of all other communities in general.
ii) Under/Second Bequest:- Feeding of Sadhus and distribution of cash doles to poor people of the Jyothinagara Vysya Community.
The funds relating to item (i) and (ii) shall be separately dealt with and the account also kept separate.
3. MEANS TO CARRY OUT OBJECTS:- The means employed for the attainment of the objects mentioned in the Trust 24 Deed shall be by the provision of (a) Hostel for Jyothinagara Vysya students (b) Literary Sections, primary, Middle and High Schools (c) College and (d) Instruction in minor industrial objects.
4. COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT:- The affairs of the institution shall be managed by a Committee of Management consisting of a Chairman and nine members of whom six shall be members of the Jyothinagara Vysya Community and the rest (three) leading representatives of Bangalore city. The Chairman shall be from any Community. Both the Chairman and the members of the Committee of Management shall be appointed once in four years by the Government of Karnataka.
5. FORFEITURE OF MEMBERSHIP:- They will hold office as long as they are able to discharge their duties efficiently and the Government can remove any Committee of Management or any member thereof, at any time, for adequate reasons.
6. VACANCIES AMONG MEMBERS:- When vacancies occur among the members of the Committee of Management, members of the Jyothinagara Vysya Committee shall be selected if the vacancies relate to the members of that Community and in the case of others, leading representatives from the City of Bangalore and the proposals shall be submitted to Government for approval.
7. POWERS:- The Committee of Management shall exercise all the powers conferred by the Trust Deed and the Second Bequest and be responsible for the proper management of the Institution and trust properties.
8.(a) They shall have full authority to deal with the properties and income of the institution for the promotion of the objects of the charities.
(b) They shall, subject to the previous approval of the Government have power to raise loans, when necessary, for improving or extending existing buildings 25 or for construction of new buildings for the trust. They may also enter into agreements with the previous approval of Government with financiers to put up new buildings on terms and conditions beneficial to the charities provided the period fixed for discharge of the debt does not exceed ten years. The Committee shall have power to obtain an overdraft up to ₹2,00,000/- whenever necessary in the current account of the State Bank of Mysore for meeting such expenses without the previous approval of Government.
9. AUDIT OF ACCOUNTS:- The accounts of the Charities shall be audited once in a year by a certified Auditor to be appointed once in two years with the previous approval of the Muzrai Commissioner and the Audit report shall be submitted to Government through the Muzrai Commissioner.
10. FURNISHING INFORMATION:- The Committee of Management shall furnish such information as may be called for by Government or the Muzrai Commissioner from time to time. They shall afford facilities for the inspection of the Institution by the Muzrai Commissioner or any other officers of suitable rank deputed by him and to carry out all directions of het Government or Muzrai Commissioner for the improvement of the charities.
... ... ..."
Rule 2 deals with the object of the Trust. Rule 4 deals with constitution of Committee of Management. It directs that the affairs of the Trust shall be managed by a Committee of Management consisting of Chairman and nine Members of whom six shall be from Jyothinagara Vysya community and the rest leading representatives of the Bangalore City. The condition is that the Chairman shall be 26 from any community. Both the Chairman and the Members of the Committee of Management are to be appointed once in four years by the Government of Karnataka.
11. What becomes clear from Rule 4 is that the Chairman can be of any community and nine other persons would be members of Vysya community and other leading representatives of Bangalore City. Therefore, it is open to the public. The appointment to the Managing Committee is for a period of four years. The vacancies among Members are dealt with under Rule 6. When vacancies among Members of the Committee of Management would occur, the Committee shall be selected from among the community that is already in representation. Leading representatives from the City may also submit their proposals to the Government and entire power of managing the Trust is with the Committee. The Government is also empowered under Rule 5 to remove any Member of the Committee of Management at any time for adequate reasons and any information about functioning of the Committee can be called for by the Commissioner for Charitable Endowments at any time and inspection of the Trust can be made at any time. 27 Therefore, the Government has every role to play in the functioning of the Trust and the public in general both of the community of Vysya's and other communities have opportunity to become Members of the Trust. Rule 27 deals with modification of the Rules. It directs that whenever it becomes necessary the Committee of Management shall have the power to add, modify or alter any of the Rules subject to prior approval of the Government.
12. It is the afore-quoted Rules that form the fulcrum of the issue in the lis. As observed hereinabove, the Committee of Management which was constituted by Government on 10-08-2018 in terms of Government order which constituted 10 Members to the Trust was for a period of four years. Therefore, it would end on 9-08-2022. On and after 10-08-2022 the new Committee of Management had to be in place. Since opportunity was available to every member of the public and to the community people in general in terms of the Rules, the applications submitted by the public in general ought to have been considered by the Government while appointing Members to the Committee of Management. On 12-09-2022 the Government has passed an order appointing 28 respondents 5 to 15 as Members of the Committee of Management. This appointment is ostensibly made on the strength of an amendment to the Rules carried out on 20-05-2021. It is further ostensible that the appointment is made at the behest of the Chief Minister as could be gathered from the reply to a query under the Right to Information Act which reads as follows:
"¸ÀASÉå: PÀAE 81 ªÀÄÄE« 2022 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ¸ÀaªÁ®AiÀÄ §ºÀĪÀĺÀr PÀlÖqÀ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ:23-09-2022 EªÀjAzÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üãÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð Dgï.¦.J.r.
PÀAzÁAiÀÄ E¯ÁSÉ (ªÀÄÄdgÁ¬Ä) ªÀÄÆ®PÀ
§ºÀĪÀĺÀr PÀlÖqÀ
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ - 560 001.
EªÀjUÉ,
²æà £ÁUÀgÁdÄ f.
ªÀQîgÀÄ, £ÀA.204, 2£Éà ªÀĺÀr
£ÀªÀ¤ªÁ¸ï C¥ÁmïðªÉÄAmï
¨ÉÃUÀÆgïPÁæ¸ï, zÉêÀgÀaPÀÌ£ÀºÀ½î
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ - 560 076.
ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉÃ,
«µÀAiÀÄ:- ²æà £ÁUÀgÁdÄ f.ªÀQîgÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀjUÉ ªÀiÁ»w ºÀPÀÄÌ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄzÀr ªÀiÁ»w MzÀV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
G¯ÉèÃR: vÀªÀÄä Cfð ¢£ÁAPÀ:20.09.2022 (¹éÃPÀÈw ¢£ÁAPÀ: 23.9.2022) **** ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢¹zÀAvÉ ªÀiÁ»w ºÀPÀÄÌ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄzÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁ»w PÉÆÃj ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ G¯ÉèÃTvÀ CfðAiÀÄ°è PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ ªÀiÁ»wUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå (1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ (2)PÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ MlÄÖ 05 ¥ÀÄlUÀ¼À zÀÈrüÃPÀÈvÀ ¥ÀæwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß EzÀgÉÆA¢UÉ ®UÀwÛ¹zÉ ºÁUÀÆ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå(3)PÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ PÀqÀvÀªÀÅ ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀÄÄRåªÀÄAwæUÀ¼À PÀbÉÃj¬ÄAzÀ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉUÉÆArzÀÝjAzÀ J¸ï.J£ï.J£ï.ZÁjl§¯ï læ¹Ö£À FV£À PÀ«Än CzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ Cfð ªÀÄvÀÄÛ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ®¨sÀå«gÀĪÀÅ¢®è JA§ ªÀiÁ»wAiÀÄ£ÀÄß vÀªÀÄUÉ w½¸À®Ä ¤zÉÃð²vÀ¼ÁVzÉÝãÉ."29
The afore-quoted answer to the query under the Right to Information Act would demonstrate two factors that no applications were submitted by respondents 5 to 15, due to which, they are not available and the reason for such non-availability is that it is approved on a note by the office of the Chief Minister. Therefore, it becomes an appointment which is made on the note generated from the office of the Chief Minister.
13. It now becomes germane to notice the judgment on which the petitioners placed reliance upon, rendered by the co-ordinate Bench, which considered the very same issue in the case of HARIKRISHNA PUNAROOR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA1 (supra). It reads as follows:
"1. The third respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Udupi, issued a notification under Section 25 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), calling for applications to appoint the Committee of Management to the 4th respondent-temple on 23-6-2009. In response to the said notification, 106 applications were received by the third respondent, including the applications of the petitioners and respondents 5 to 13. Some of the devotees filed objections for appointment of respondent 9 alleging that he is facing enquiry, etc., as per Annexures-K, L and M. 1 (2011) 1 Kant.LJ 631 30
2. When the facts stood thus, the Chief Minister of Karnataka, issued a note dated 24-7-2009 as per Annexure-D to appoint respondents 5 to 13 as members of the Committee of management of the 4th respondent-temple.
3. This note is received by the second respondent-
Commissioner on 25-7-2009. He passed an order at Annexure- A, dated 27-7-2009, appointing the very same 9 persons i.e., respondents 5 to 13 herein as the members of the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent-temple. The order at Annexure-A, dated 27-7-2009 is called in question in these writ petitions.
4. There cannot be any dispute that the note is sent by the Chief Minister as per Annexure-D, dated 24- 7-2009, directing to appoint nine persons mentioned in Annexure-D, i.e., respondents 5 to 13 as members of the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent. It is also not in dispute that very nine persons, i.e., respondents 5 to 13 are appointed as members of the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent within two days thereafter. No reasons are forthcoming in the impugned order as to why the applications of respondents 5 to 13 are allowed and of other persons are rejected. Thus, it is clear that the appointments so made are based on the directions of the Chief Minister.
5. Section 25 of the Act reveals as to how the Committee of Management has to be constituted. It prescribes that the Committee shall be constituted by the prescribed authority having regard to the religious denomination to which the institution or any section thereof belongs. No person shall be eligible to be appointed as a member in more than one Committee of management at one time. The prescribed authority shall constitute the Committee of management from among the devotees, donors and followers of the Hindu Religious Institutions or, as the case may be, the endowers and beneficiaries of the charitable endowment in such manner that it consists of (i) Pradhana Archaka or archaka; (ii) at least one member from among the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled 31 Tribes; and (iii) at least five, of whom, two are women, from among persons living in the vicinity of the temple. No person shall be qualified for being appointed as a member of the Committee of Management unless he has faith in God; he has attained the age of 25 years; he possesses good conduct and reputation and commands respect in the locality in which the institution is situate; and he has donated or contributed for construction, repair, renovation or development of any Hindu religious institution or charitable institution, etc. Rule 22 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Rules, 2002 also prescribes the procedure for constitution of the Committee of Management. The said rule mandates that the nominations received shall be verified by the prescribed authority or by an officer authorised by it in this behalf with regard to the age, qualification, disqualification, antecedents, etc. Thus, it is clear that the Managing Committee members should be selected by the prescribed authority in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Section 25 of the Act read with Rule 22 of the Rules. The minimum requirement is that the prescribed authority shall get itself satisfied about the age, qualification, disqualification, antecedents, etc., of the members of the Managing Committee by applying his mind on the subject of appointment. In the matter on hand, such a procedure is not followed. The second respondent herein has blindly followed the note issued by the Chief Minister.
The Act is a self-contained Code. All the authorities mentioned therein are statutory authorities. They are bound by the provisions of the Act. They must act within the four corners thereof: The State, although, have a general control, but such control must be exercised strictly in terms of Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Having regard to the nature and- the manner of the control specified therein, it may lay down a policy. Statutory authorities are bound to act in terms thereof, but per se the same does not authorise any Minister including the Chief Minister to act in derogation of the statutory provisions. Constitution of India does not envisage functioning of the Government through the Chief Minister alone. All Governmental orders must comply with the requirements of a statute as also the constitutional provisions. Our constitution envisages a rule of 32 law and not rule of men. It recognises that, howsoever high one may be, he is under law and the Constitution. All the constitutional functionaries must, therefore, function within the constitutional limits. In the matter of appointment of Committee of Management, the Minister or the Chief Minister has no say. The Chief Minister or any authority, other than the statutory authority, therefore, could not entertain any application for appointment of a member to the Committee of the Management nor could issue any order thereon. Even any authority under the Act, including the Appellate Authority cannot issue any direction, except when the matter comes up before it under the statute.
Nothing is placed on record to show that the Chief Minister in his capacity as a member of the Cabinet was authorised to deal with the matter of appointment of members of Managing Committee of notified temple in his official capacity. The prescribed authority being statutory body is bound to act strictly in terms of the provisions thereof. It cannot act in derogation of the powers conferred on it. While acting as a statutory authority, it must act having regard to the procedure laid down in the Act. It cannot by-pass or ignore the same. Factual Matrix, as indicated in - Annexure-D clearly goes to show that office of Chief Minister Communicated the note of the Chief Minister to the prescribed authority. On the basis of the same, impugned order is issued.
In view of the above and as the impugned order at Annexure-A, is fully based on the note issued by the Chief Minister, the same cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27-7-2009 at Annexure-A, stands quashed."
(Emphasis supplied) The co-ordinate Bench was considering the purport of Section 25 of the Act where the Government is empowered to appoint a 33 Committee of Management of any Trust. The co-ordinate Bench quashed the said appointment as it emanated from the note sent by the office of the Chief Minister. The situation in the case at hand is also similar as that is what is replied to on a query under the Right to Information Act. No applications of respondents 5 to 15 are available. The petitioners have appended their applications to become Members of the Trust and the respondents have also appended their respective applications that are said to have been submitted for appointment as Members of the Trust. There are no proceedings of Government or any decision taken on the basis of scrutiny of applications so submitted prior to passing of the impugned order i.e., 12.09.2022. Therefore, the appointments to the Committee of Management which have emanated from the Chief Minister are unsustainable in the light of interpretation of Section 25 of the Act by the co-ordinate Bench (supra).
14. Insofar as the amendment to the Rules are concerned, the amendment though takes within its sweep several issues of giving representation to women, the restriction of age that is set in the amendment of Members to be only between the ages of 40 and 34 70, has no rationale behind it, apart from the fact that the amendment was not even notified to anybody and it has emanated from a communication of the Managing Committee to the Government. The communication of the Managing Committee is also not placed on record either by the State or the respondents who claim to be the present Members of the Committee of Management. Therefore, the allegation that everything has happened clandestinely, as alleged by the petitioners, stands to reason. Therefore, the amendment to the Rules also require re- consideration. While the power to amend the Rules is available in Rule 27 (supra) but it should with the prior approval of the Government. The amendment to the Rules should emanate from the Committee of Management and such amendment sought for should be made known to all concerned and such prior approval should be granted by Government for the Managing Committee to undertake amendment to Rules and then the Government should notify the same.
15. There are no proceedings that are produced before this Court by any of the respondents to demonstrate that the 35 Committee of Management did propose the amendment to the Rules and the proposal was made known to all and with such approval it was brought into effect. Except quoting a sentence in the order "PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀAvÉ" there are no proceedings even indicated in the order dated 20-05-2021. Therefore, the said order is also rendered unsustainable. The entire exercise of appointment of Managing Committee and amendment to the Rules will have to be redone in a manner stipulated under the Rules, as both these actions which are done are contrary to the Rules.
16. The learned counsel appearing for the present Committee of Management has pleaded grave urgency for several of the statutory payments and salaries to be made to all the institutions run by the Trust and to meet expenses of Janopakari Sri Doddanna Swamy Jayanthi Celegration (Founder of the Trust) funds are required. Therefore, pending all the aforesaid actions of redoing exercise that this Court has directed, the Government shall oversee immediately release of funds as sought by the present Committee of Management.
36
17. For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ Petitions are allowed in part.
(ii) Government Orders dated 20-05-2021, 12-09-2022 and 23-09-2022 stand quashed. It is declared that the amendment made to the Rules, though not contrary, will have to be redone bearing in mind the observations made in the course of this order and to that extent stand quashed.
(iii) Government shall reconsider the applications submitted by the petitioners and the respondents, if any, and then appoint Members to the Committee of Management of the Trust which would be for a period of four years from the date of such appointment.
(iv) The State Government shall oversee release of funds as sought for by the present Committee of Management for the purpose of disbursement of salaries; audit fees, annual IT returns for AY 2021-22 filing fees; SLN Charities campus-Security services payment; old age pension, SLN Free Hostel expenses; expenses towards Janopakari Sri Doddanna Swamy Jayanthi Celebration and Scholarhips for Girls and Prathibha Puraskara.
All the pending applications stand disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkp CT:MJ 37 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [SRI V MUNICHETTY AND OTHERS VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS] MNPJ 09.06.2023 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) ORDER ON I.A.NO.2/2023 in W.P.No.22090/2022 Office objection if any, to be complied with, forthwith. This application is filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners seeking a direction to consider the applications and conclude the proceedings before the Committee so constituted / to be constituted. These petitions were disposed on 02.02.2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents would submit and admit that, this Court while disposing the petitions, had indicated that the proceedings should be concluded within four weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of the order dated 02.02.2023, but the same is inadvertently omitted in the order. Therefore, they seek appropriate direction in this regard. 38
The submissions are placed on record. The time frame of four weeks for concluding the proceedings as submitted by the learned counsel for the parties appears to be inadvertently omitted. Therefore, the order dated 02.02.2023, shall be complied within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order i.e., from 09.06.2023.
This order shall be read as part and parcel of the order dated 02.02.2023.
Sd/-
JUDGE nvj List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6