«V S N 'I"33.i3pk:_RtM=ui
smte ofxamamka
1:: mm maxi mum on mnnanuu AT
Dated this the 27:2: day ofAugust, 200$: V K
BEFQRE J X
mm aorrnm my 4% F:r:canizr1:sam.,%' k
wm Pcfigea No;-._.'i:145*§:3 GM-Rig
3137"? EEN:
1 Sri J Kama: .;
Aged 5O3ycar$_,. " é
Udzizya 7'; Q
Vie?-7"'V-_» 4' _ ' '
--- 57;?
2 Sri K
o"Latc Mmhéby
' . . . . . .. 'V
' 'f§fig(}fi'K:3§'fl:kHfl8dy Post
-9575002
" z Sn' Pmtap Madhyasta Advocratc)
F By its Smrctary
' Dcparlzmcnt of R4".-%us fin
Charitahlc Endowments
Vikas Soudha
Bangalore 'git'
'RX v'i1l '6<. *5"; f1"£'3 IIGHV "" "Hon issued by the tl1u'd' respondent
— manéiggfittent. Suxyanamyana Tcmplc situated at Mamli,
Dakshina Kannma D7mtr:ict.
fiamplc is situatad. They art: than devotm. The Kaxnatah
“Hindu Refigious Insfituijgna and Charimblc Endowments Act.
2 The Commissioner for
Religbus as Charitable Endmammcnts
C’-hamarajpct
Bangalom
3 The Deputy Commissioner for
Religious as Charitable ”
Dakslfma Kannada " (By % W This Writ Petition is .226 md 2227 of
the Constitution c§i”!;1dia.; qusgh the in-pumed
publication dated ‘–t20t’38 iissued by = respondent-3 at
This a:§;]forg;m1’mainaxy heafmg this
day, the Cfkmrt ‘mad; tlzgfiftzlicwayving: ‘
Vj;9_,_rt—BL: R
Tim. péfifiofiéra ‘ha.fm Qhanlengcd in this Writ Pbt1t1cm’ ‘
for constituting 3 committee fin’ the
‘ ‘£9: The pcfitioncm are I-cam’ ants of Mfilom when:
1997 has been struck down by a Division Bench cfthis Court.
k/
that the order which has been
operative fmm the date of the pasmiag of
T; ‘ham existence. ‘I’hen:fome, the staying of the
c.~r4m¢eemmim Bench of this Oeurt man not have the
bf’;-‘hping out the Act in the statute book. when the Act is
fcrztzac the authorities are under a legal obligation to mix:
Now the Supreme Court has entertained an appeal
said judgmmt and has stayed the operation of the
the Division mm. Though an intmim order or§ta3§}s _
it would not have the efibct cf
the notification issued under the
by this Court: is mega: and 1iab1c’£e:jic.%sct
3. In the first place; no stamii
to challenge the nefificafiqttvfigt intention of
making an in notification
They are not” post. Though the
been sayed by the
Supmme the jtldgmt of the High’
Court wfii tilt-~’tthe Supreme Court ciecidm the
the” does not mean that the said order has
xx,/t
action in accmdaucc with law which they ~
Thcrcfem, I do not find any merit in ” ”
it is