R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL)

The petitioner is aggrieved of the fact that the

hereditary rights although granted in favour of the 5^th

- 3 -

respondent’s father and after his demise there being no

specific orders passed by the competent authority

confirming the hereditary Archakship rights, nevertheless,

on a Power of Attorney said to have been given by the

5^th respondent in favour of the 6^th respondent, the

6^th

respondent

is

carrying

on

the

Archakship

of

Sri.Mookambika Temple, Kolluru. The petitioner gave a

representation to the Commissioner to take action.

Consequently, the Commissioner passed an order on

25.03.2022 upholding the contentions of the petitioner,

while directing the 2^nd respondent-Executive Officer of

the temple to take action and ensure that the religious

function of the temple are carried on only by a person

entitled to do the Archakship in accordance with Section 9

(1) of the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable

Endowments Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act’, for short). However, the 5^th respondent preferred a

Revision

Petition

before

the

Principal

Secretary,

Department of Revenue and Muzrai, challenging the orders

passed by the Commissioner. The Principal Secretary to

- 4 -

the Government of Karnataka passed the impugned order

dated 10.08.2023 remanding the matter back to the

Commissioner for reconsideration. The petitioner is before

this Court challenging the said order passed by the

Principal Secretary to the Government of Karnataka at

Annexure-L.

2. Learned Additional Government Advocate was

directed to secure instructions from the respondents, in

view of the fact that a Circular dated 25.01.2021 was

issued by the Commissioner, Department of Religious

Institutions and Charitable Endowments, clearly directing

that the Archakships of the muzrai institutions in the State

shall be permitted to be conducted only by persons who

are eligible and entitled to be appointed to the said posts

and such religious functions shall not be permitted to be

conducted on the basis of a Power of Attorney given by the

persons who have been appointed to the said posts. In

that view of the matter, this Court had directed the

learned

Additional

Government

Advocate

to

secure

- 5 -

instructions as to why a Circular issued by the State

Government is not being followed in the present case.

Learned Additional Government Advocate on instructions

submits that the impugned order has been passed by the

Principal Secretary to the Government of Karnataka

directing the Commissioner to pass orders in accordance

with Section 9(1) of the Act, though it is not worded so

happily.

3. In the considered opinion of this Court, such an

order has already been passed by the Commissioner on

25.03.2022 at Annexure-H, directing the Executive Officer

to ensure that the Archakships and the religious functions

are carried on only by such a person who is entitled to be

appointed in terms of Section 9(1) of the Act. That being

the position, the petitioner is entitled for the relief sought

for namely to direct the Executive Officer to implement the

orders passed by the Commissioner and ensure that the

Archakship and religious functions in Sri.Mookambika

Temple, Kolluru, is conducted by only such person who is

- 6 -

entitled to be appointed in terms of Section 9(1) of the

Act.

4. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed

of while clarifying the impugned order passed by the

Principal Secretary to the Government of Karnataka at

Annexure-L dated 10.08.2023. The 2^nd respondent-

Executive Officer of Sri.Mookambika Temple, Kolluru, is

hereby directed to comply with the directions issued by

the Commissioner in the order dated 25.03.2022 at

Annexure-H and ensure that only such person who is

entitled to be appointed as an Archak under Section 9(1)

of the Act shall perform the functions of the Archak at

Sri.Mookambika Temple, Kolluru and none-else. The

circular dated 25.01.2021 shall be kept in mind and

followed.

Fo