Karnataka High Court
Sri M Venkataramana vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 August, 2010
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
Bench: Ajit J Gunjal
c ' A 'Rep. by the Secretary, ' -».M=.S.Bui1dings, Revenue Dept, 1 Bengaluru --~ 560 001. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 25" DAY OF AUGUST 20 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J.Gu<:$§JA§;[ " WRIT PETITION NOS.61"83,'2:O_1CA A 9 1 16/2o10(GMaR;et}t BETWEEN I 1. Sri.M.Venkataraman;_a, 50 years, _ Son of Sri.J.Muniyappa; R/at No.68, 4th Ma1fnRrjad;'-- A Sampangiraina"_'Nag_ara, _ - Benga111_.rL1"--5 50 Yfiaitfiv A . _. Son of.G0pa1a. Krishfxa' V' R/ at Sat Krishna 'Niiaya. P:§1taa1amm'a._'Femp}e Street, S;_-'gage, Benga.1um--56o 078 A A Ti t[E::33f:VS;fi.;C_2:t}.aLndraiah, Adv.) The-$atate of Karnataka, The Commissioner, The Religious Institutions 81 Charitable Endowments. . . PETITI ONERS Government of Karnataka, Opp: Minto Haspital, Chamaraja Pete, Bengaluru ~ 560 018. 3. Sri.Lakshmi Narasimha Dharma Samsthe Fort, _ Bengaluru, Rep: by its 1 '' Secretary. 4. Srnt.Usha Rani, Aged about 50 years, W/0.Sri.G0wda, R/at No.2009, 22nd C Main Road, _ 1431 Cross, 1$?SectiQn,,_'--.. ' I-ISR Lay0ut;«,._ I Bengalufli." " 5. Smt_,\[1shaa1é.aks1_L1,'--. «. R ' Aged 5'5y:ears;'f:-3 " 13/ 'Q.Cho1:ka11ngan':1.,yV _ . R/atNo.443, ~«1i?.tb' cross, 3531 Niaiti Read'; .6?hS~tage, Benga11jruV'--~5'60 'O78; " . 6."':e4Str1;.1'»':[.R;1muVgV eeeee ~ * 1 " -. Aged about 54 years, " S0Ii"Of'1"1ar'appa. '-- A 'R/at Pattahduru Agrahara, ...44Wh1tesR' Fleld Post, K.R,APura1'n Hobli, V Bengalum. ...RESPONDENTS
V' * (By Sri.A.Madhusudhana Rao, Adv. for R4 to R6, M/S.Ra0 8: Rao, Advs. for R3, Sri.Narendra Prasad, I-ICGP for R1 8: R2) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the notice dated 23.01.2010 issued by"*the Commissioner, the Religious Institutions and Chgaritable Endowments, Govt. of Karnataka at Benga1uru..i.e.,," V. vide Annexure 'C' and etc. .. ' These writ petitions comings' nu hearing in 'B' Group, this day,I_ the C.o'urt_'made._p_tIj1gAep' following: V 0' '-- ~ Respondent No:.3_ islN'an..:'jpnotifiedédylristitution. Pursuant to a Trust 1930 and a bequest object of the Trust is to intellectual and Industrial of the pupils of Jyothinagara Vysya Co'i1iri11.init3rV*Vi'n' particular and the pupils of all p_ other co'P'arnun'it~ies___in general. The said 3"' respondent .__is required to be managed by the Conimitteeo1'fV'l\/lanagement consisting of a Chairman and nine members of whom four shall be members of A CT thetlyothinagara Vysya Community and the rest leading . representatives of the City. It is not in dispute that a Committee of Management was formed consisting of +2 _/2"?"
nine members. But however, four of the members were under suspension pursuant to the order passed4.b#.4:'t11e 2nd respondent. The remaining H Committee of the Management of "
only five in number. According»tofthje proper committee would of v T' six members as per ..§ection~-VVV2'p.'§.(3}.,pAot.the._Karnataka Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments 3 . 2 of petitioners is that the 2-iaé a notice. which is ififeii' other three members to convene pwa-- .04.02.2010 to elect the President of the...Comrrii'ttee of Management of the 3rd .t*respon5cient._ The""petitioners*wou1d contend that they their objections on 04.02.2010 opposing e1e_ctioAn of the President to the Committee of the Management of respondent No.3. Suffice it to say that "th'e-three members have elected the 4th respondent as "iiresident of the Trust and it has been accepted and notified by the 2116 respondent. The said acceptance is _ 5 _ questioned by the petitioners before this Court. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are the members ofthe existing Committee. it C V
2. The learned counsel appearing for M submits with reference to Sectio1i""25[.3)(iiil that a Committee should consist.__ inasmuch as one of them the remaining two should andvscheduled tribe. He submits of the Committee is alndipcontrargf"vtofthe statute. He furtherlzsubmits-".th_at tl1ere__ was no quorum as on the date when ei'ec'tiVon.'::'"Vf;las held to elect respondent No.4,,a..s"the of the Committee. 23; Cvlearned counsel appearing for respondent that the constitution of Committee was gsubjvedt matter of a writ petition and a writ appeal the writ appeal, it is directed that the existing nlfcommittee should continue and the order of the learned C' A' Single Judge would not affect the appointment. Indeed fig X ~. the 'tqtiorum the order of the Division Bench would stem from an order passed by the learned Single W.P.No. 17068 / 2007, which was filed by a devotee: _ temple. Be that as it may, the fact. ,remaiiis" "
now, the constitution of the Comlmittee be Valid.
4. The only to be considered in the present whether the remaining Indeed this is i:2s:2fipthi:rei'erence to Rule 23 of the ._ Institutions and Charitable Endowmeiits J§Rule 23 would speak about i'o-r.__the meeting of the Committee of Ma11ag'eniei1t:;"v Indeed the provision would indicate that tlie°bquVortim.'a*'for the meeting of the Committee of "._,pmanagement shall be one--third of the members "ii V'_incl'1;.ding the Chairman and the casting of vote is to be ' exercised by the Chairman. In the case on hand, it is to be noticed that the Committee consists of nine members. Out of the said nine members, four have been suspended and five members are required to elect a Chairman. Indeed to my mind, Rule 23 WC1l1t14§"'bC clearly applicable inasmuch as the stren_g1§h"oi"dV:' _ quorum of the meeting is as indicated' undier' of it the Rules. The members have elected eresipondienti.No.'i;1}:
as the Chairman of the Commvittee ar1d__the C' been accepted by the resipon'dentp._ I.'aI'n..ofA,.the View that the same cannot suspension does not the vacancy is created an enquiry is pending ' C V suspended members.
Hence,vV"".IVV: that there was sufficient quorum as the"dateCa.nd the petitioners were notified, participated in the said meeting albeit with certain.éresetfvations. I am of the View that the question of ""4-.int.erference in the process of eiecting the 4th . Arespondient as the Chairman does not arise. 'C Petitions stand rejected. W
5. Mr.Narendra Prasad, lamed HCGP appearing for the respondents is permitted to file 1:ne;r1_f1.(.)V »p'1"._V_ appearance within four weeks.
SPS