SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
H. H. Sankaracharya Swamigal Kanchi Kamakodi Peetam Hereditary Trustee Sri Viswanatha Swamy Devasthanam Melavanjur, Thirumalairaya Pattinam Pondicherry – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Tourism, Culture and Charitable Endowments Department Fort St. George Chennai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the jurisdictional questions (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual matrix regarding temple jurisdiction (Para 3) |
| 3. findings of the learned single judge (Para 4) |
| 4. arguments from both parties regarding jurisdiction (Para 5) |
| 5. amicus curiae's observations on jurisdiction (Para 6) |
| 6. court's interpretation of laws governing jurisdiction (Para 7) |
| 7. discussion on appointment of fit persons and property management (Para 8) |
| 8. final directions and order of the court (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.
A. The Questions:
1. The questions which arise for our determination in this Writ Appeal are,
(ii) even if they had jurisdiction, whether a fit person can be appointed in respect of property of the temple?
B. The Appeal:
2. This Writ Appeal is directed against the Order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.01.2020 in W.P.No.23096 of 2013, by the said order, the learned Single Judge had dispose
Anant Prasad Lakshminiwas Ganeriwal Vs. State of A.P. And others
Ramaswarup Guru Chhote Balakdas Vs. Motiram Khandu Patil and others
Charity Commissioner, Bombay Vs. Administrator of the Shringeri Math and its properties
State authorities cannot exercise jurisdiction over a temple located in another territory, highlighting the importance of territorial jurisdiction in religious endowments.
The appointment of non-hereditary trustees is valid under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act when there is evidence of mismanagement by hereditary trustees, and full legal procedures a....
The determination of a temple's status as public or private hinges on the right of public access and the evidence of dedication to public worship, not merely on the presence of public worship.
Point of law: Section 63, it is the Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner who has to decide any dispute as to whether an institution is a religious institution or not. Even before deciding whethe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Assistant Commissioner does not have the power to declare an institution as a religious institution and appoint a fit person under Section....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.