Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 33981
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Suraj Govindaraj, J
SRI. N. ANIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 19727 OF 2026 (GM-R/C)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pavan Sagar, Shwetha L.
For the Respondents: C.H. Devaraj
Discrimination against an individual based on a non-contagious medical condition (vitiligo) for performing religious duties is arbitrary and violates Article 14 of the Constitution, provided there is no scriptural prohibition.
Headnote:The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to be permitted to perform hereditary duties as a Sannidhi Paricharaka at a temple, citing Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner had inherited the post via a registered Will, but was subsequently obstructed from performing pujas on the grounds of suffering from vitiligo. Medical certificates and reports from Agama Pandits confirmed that the condition was non-contagious and not prohibited by religious texts. The court found that the exclusion of an individual based on a non-contagious medical condition is arbitrary and discriminatory. The primary issue was whether a non-contagious medical condition or the delegation of duties to a substitute could justify the denial of hereditary rights to perform religious duties. The court reasoned that "mere physical appearance or the existence of a non-contagious medical condition... cannot constitute a valid basis for differential treatment" and that such exclusion would offend the constitutional values of dignity and inclusiveness. Regarding delegation, the court held that while the state may impose "reasonable conditions" on the use of substitutes, such delegation cannot be a ground to deny the right entirely. The Writ Petition is allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. inheritance of priestly duties and the dispute arising from a non-contagious skin condition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. validity of medical and scriptural opinions in determining eligibility for religious duties. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. non-contagious medical conditions cannot justify discrimination under article 14 of the constitution. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. regulation of delegation is permissible but cannot be used to deny a fundamental hereditary right. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO ABIDE BY AND TO CONSEQUENTLY PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO PERFORM THE HEREDITARY DUTIES OF A SANNIDHI PARICHARAKA AT THE CHAMUNDESHWARI TEMPLE, CHAMUNDI HILLS, MYSORE FOR A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS IN A CALENDAR YEAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDER BEARING NO. DVS-1/SIBBANDI/CR16/16-17 DATED 21.06.2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (VIDE ANNEXURE C) AND THE ORDER BEARING NO. ADM/1/CR/102/16-17 DATED 20.12.2017 PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT (VIDE ANNEXURE E) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent to abide by and to consequently permit the Petitioner to perform the hereditary duties of a Sannidhi Paricharaka at the Chamundeshwari Temple, Chamundi Hills, Mysore for a period of two months in a calendar year in accordance with the order bearing No. DVS-1/Sibbandi/CR16/16-17 dated 21.06.2016 passed by the 3rd Respondent (vide Annexure C) and the order bearing No. ADM/1/CR/102/16-17 dated 20.12.2017 passed by the 4th Respondent (vide Annexure E);
(ii) Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Prohibition thereby restraining the respondents or any of their subordinate office bearers from in any manner interfering, objecting or obstructing to the Petitioner performing the hereditary duties of a Sannidhi Paricharaka at the Chamundeshwari Temple, Chamundi Hills, Mysore for a period of two months in a calendar year on the ground of his ineligibility arising from his skin condition;
(iii) Pass such other writ, order or direction, as may be deemed necessary by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case;
2. The petitioner's uncle was serving as a Sannidhi Paricharaka at the Chamundeshwari Temple, Chamundi Hills, Mysuru, during his lifetime. He had executed a registered Will dated 17.10.2015, bequeathing his hereditary right to the said post in favour of the petitioner. Upon the death of the said uncle on 17.01.2016, the petitioner sought transfer of the inherited rights in his favour. Consequently, respondent No.3 - the Deputy Commissioner, by order dated 21.06.2016, transferred the rights and privileges attached to the said post in favour of the petitioner.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner commenced discharging the duties attached to the said post. Certain complaints were allegedly received from devotees objecting to the petitioner performing pujas on the ground that he was suffering from vitiligo. In that regard, an enquiry was conducted and the petitioner was subjected to medical examination. A certificate dated 01.02.2017 was thereafter issued by the competent medical authority certifying that the condition suffered by the petitioner was not contagious.
4. Subsequently, a further dispute arose as to whether a person suffering from vitiligo could perform pujas. Accordingly, the opinion of Agama Pandits was sought. The Agama Pandits, after examining the relevant religious texts, submitted a report dated 20.12.2017 stating that there was nothing in the texts which prohibited or prevented a person suffering from vitiligo from performing pujas or discharging duties as a Sannidhi Paricharaka. Pursuant thereto, the pet
