IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1610 OF 2024 (GM-R/C)

BETWEEN: K R SATISH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR SRI. VINEETH S, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O LATE K R SATISH NO.4804, 2ND BLOCK, 9TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS, BSK I STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 050.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHINAV RAMANAND A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AMBIKA H B DEPARTMENT OF MUZRAI Location: M.S.BUILDING, High Court DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI of Karnataka BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2. THE COMMISSIONER, KARNATAKA HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, 4^TH FLOOR, SRI MALAIMAHADESHWARA VARTHA BHAVANA ALUR VENKAT RAO ROAD, CHAMRAJPET, BENGALURU 560 004.

3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRI. LAKSHMINARASIMHASWAMY TEMPLE, BALEPET, BANGALORE - 560 053.

4. SMT. LALITHA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS W/O. LATE.K.S.VARADACHAR

5. SMT. B.V. ARUNA DEVI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O. SRI. K.S. KRISHNANARAYANA DIKSHIT

6. SMT. B.V. ARCHANA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, W/O. SRI. SANTOSH, RESPONDENTS NOS. 4 TO 6 AT NO.201, SRINIVASA TEMPLE STREET, BALEPETE, BENGALURU 560 053.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. SURESH.S.LOKRE, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI. SHRAVAN.S.LOKRE, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER DATED 23/09/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.56812/2015 AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 23.09.2024 ['impugned order'] passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.56812/2015 (GM-R/C).

2. The appellant had preferred the said petition impugning an order dated 08.10.2015 passed by respondent No.2 [Additional Deputy Commissioner] appointing respondent No.4 as Pradhana Archaka of Sri Lakshminarasimhaswamy Temple, Balepete Bengaluru. During the course of the writ petition, the original petitioner [Sri K.R. Satish] expired and the writ petition was pursued by his son – the appellant in the present appeal. The learned Single Judge, after considering the nature of the disputes, held that the dispute fell within the scope of clause (iii) of sub- section (6) of Section 25-B of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, Act, 1997 [hereafter referred to as 'the 1997 Act'] and therefore, in terms of Section 25-

B(6) of the Act, 1997, the disputes were required to be adjudicated by the Deputy Commissioner. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge has remanded the matter to the respondent No.2 [Deputy Commissioner], to take a decision as to the rights of the rival parties after affording them an opportunity to be heard.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has assailed the impugned order, essentially on three fronts.

3.1. First, he submits that the Deputy Commissioner is not the appropriate Authority to render any decision on the subject dispute. He submits that in terms of Rule 3 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Rules, 2002, [hereafter 'the Rules'] the Commissioner is the appropriate Authority, as the Temple in question is classified as a class 'A'

Temple.

3.2. Second, he submits the power of the Deputy Commissioner to decide the questions as referred to in Sub-section (6) of Section 25-B of the 1997 Act is to be read in conjunction of Sub-section (1) Section 25-B of the 1997 Act, which pertains to framing a scheme. In other words, he contends that the questions referred to under Section 25-B(6) of the 1997 Act can be adjudicated by the Deputy Commissioner only if a scheme i