High Court Karnataka High Court

Shree Somanatha Seva … vs The Commissioner For Endowments … on 18 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Shree Somanatha Seva … vs The Commissioner For Endowments … on 18 December, 2008
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
E

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 18"' DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008

BEFORE

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDm?._'___j  A' 

“WRIT PETITION N0.10794 or 2006 (GMQREST E

BETWEEN

1

MANCEALORE TALUK D.K.

SHREE SOMANATHA SEVA SAM1THn_REGE.T,. . ” ‘
UNDER THE KARNAKAKAV ‘*SOCIET1ES_ ‘ V ” ._’
REGISTRATION ACT, HAVINGEEITS OF’FICE–AT
NO.AS.1()9/81~»82,__ _~ ._
KOTEKAR POST V ‘_ _ ‘ _
MANGALORE TALUK;D–..K;OR1EP BEETS _
PRESIDENT B DEVAPPA CéA’I’TI,.-~«..v ” V J
S/O PAKEERA GATT1;*7’QfYRS_”»S.._ 1 T ”
KATTAPUNI’MANE;KAF’ANJ.E”»IILLAGE AND POST
MANGATLOREijVTALU;{, D_,K i;

K LINGAPPA GA’TTI’ .. _
S /O KeK1TTU”GATf:1..

AGE:71″T’RS
§;OTE;KAR,”*EEER1,

-[R*OT.EmR POST ———-
PETITIONERS

(By’S1fiiEA K.O’iiAN’;:~RANATH ARIGA )

V T’ _ AND

VSTHEEECOMMISSIONER FOR ENDOWMENTS
‘EARNATAKA

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HR 85 CE, D.K
MANGALORE 575 001

»»v\

Q

xiii)

fa)

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY THE SECRETARY (REVENUE)
DEPT OF REVENUE 81; RELIGIOUS
AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS
M.S.BUILDING

VIDHANA VEEDHI

BANGALOREWI

SR1 RAVINDRA ULLALA ‘

s/0 LATE MONAPPA, SARASWA’iT}~_TI”~NILAYA,A C O’

GANDHINAGARA, ULLALA

SMT MAMATHA B W/0 vA=s.u’G—-OPAL

NO. 1 1w~16A, PRAKRUTHI, .’VSH_IVA._SH2A-KTHI
NAGAR, SOMESHWOARA-, }:_QiTE:KARj POST
SR1 K SUKUMA RAG” _ . ..

s/0 LATE’ KLSUNDARA RAG»
_
KOTEKAR,-‘VILLAGE ‘

SR1 CHANjD_RAf3HEICAnR Y ADKA

s/-Q YUDVH’iSTI»RA9, YUDISTIRA NILAYA,
KA11,AsAm_GA1f<A;' S.O'ME;-SHWARA,
KOTEKAR POST,' .

3 4SR1AAYOGEESHVOSOVMESHWAR
VT s/QLATE BO’}3’~E’;’f”POOJARY,

NEAR AMANDA ASHRAMA HIGH SCHOOL,

– “SOMESE’iW;’x.RA, KOTEKAR POST.

‘ “SR1 _:)}i4grs,_4cf)DARA ULLAL KOTIAN
“es/0 MONAYYA, DANYAVADA,

MAGAVEERA TOWN, ULLALA.

“SR1 MADYARU SHANTHARAM SHETTY
A ‘ – -S/ O THYAMPANNA SHETTY,

MADYARU HOUSE
KOTEKAR POST, MANGALORE.

J

1 1 SMT PUSHPALATHA J K
ADVOCATE, D / O MLOKAYYA,
POONAM GREEN PARK LAYOUT,
GURUVAPPA COMPOUND ROAD,
PANDESI-IWARA, MANGALORE.

12 CHIEF’ PRIEST _
SRI SOMANATHA TEMPLE, SOMESHWARA”~–._

13 THE COMMITTEE OF’ MANAGER/IENT..V -:’ ‘
SRI SOMANATHA TEMPLE, ” ‘I ‘

SOMESHWARA. .,’.~..RESPONIjENTS A

THIS WRIT PETITION F’I”E;-ED PRAYIN’o-TO”i.,QUASH
THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED B\_’____TI€{E=.R1 ATANNEXURE A
BY ISSUING A WRIT CE’RTI’OR.’\Fd.,_ OR ANY” OTHER
APPROPIRATE WRIT DECI;’AR1′–N(:a’IT ABE ILLEGAL AND
VOID ETC., =

THIS WRIT’:-. PEETIiT,I’.ON.,,”77_C.QMI§No ON FOR
PRELIMINARY x_HEAR.ING. IN B_,.(3—ROU’P” THIS DAY,TI-IE

COURT,7’MAbEfTHE’A

The Seheme, _fo1″n1,u1a”ted by the Deputy Commissioner

u’of~~~~th” Madras Hindu Religious and

LChaTritab1e'” ‘_E:nd-owments Act, 1951, provides for

repreisentatioij the ‘Gatti’ Community in the management

‘,.comr:u1it.teae«:_of the temple.
* .=.__2.VV”Learned Add1.Govt. Advocate files an affidavit

j_d’a_teCi”:16.12.2008 of Srnt. Pushpalatha U K, presently a
” E I

.9’

member of the committee of management claiming to belong

to ‘Gatti’ community from the reserved category for women.

In that View of the matter, there is substantial

of the scheme formulated by the Deputy i-

ensure that the Gatti community_…i.s__rep:*elsente’§:l

management committee of the temple,’

In the circumstances llfurther for
consideration in this petition rejected.
It is needless to state __of management

whose term comes to a enddduring:V.pJ’Lii1eV,l”5iO09, shall stand

recor1sti_tuted_ A”in._» aceordan~ce with law, providing for a

representationgfrom Gs.atti”eQmn;1unity.

Sd/~
Judge