IN TIIE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAI§I§;§I§I_.QRE
DATED THIS THE 15*" DAY OF SEPTEM.!%{ER"'?.(j){)29:
;.t..
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICEIANANID
WRIT PETITION NO .--.$'383 OF 2007
BETWEEN: k j
Sri.G0vindaraju, _ I
Son of Late Go\*Vindai21hs'* . V
Aged about 56'yea_'t--'s, __
Residing Halli," T .
H _ --
Banga}'0re'N0rth.Ta1ukI*a.__ ". ' PETITIONER
(By sh;-i%;'eI<tIV%su11§an,2.dm¢a:e)
V ., A 2 ..... .. V
T. Iiarnataka,
Secretary,
Revetitje Department,
" H "M.S.Bui'lC1ir1g,
-Sangaiore-560 O0}.
" 'Z; The Tahsildar,
Bangalore N orth Ta1uk(Additi0'na1)
Yekahanka Satellite Town,
"Bangalore. 3
Ix)
3. Sri.Narayanamurthy,
Aged about 30 years,
Father's name not know
Residing at Srirampura,
Jakkur Post,
Bangalore North Taluk.
4. Station House Officer,
Yelahanka Police Station,
Bangalore. ' ~ A
5. The Assistant_Commiswsioner;_ ll A V
Bangalore.vNcrth Sub-Divisio«n,l"v so _
Bangalona... u if: V. .
6. The..Cort1niiss'iQ,_nVer ford" "
RcV:i1igioius and C'ha1-i_tab.J_e
Institution in Ka1fnatai<.a,"" = l '
Charn.ara_iMpet,V.V_' ' V'
Bangalore-560 019. t _.. RESPONDENTS
Slririi–‘-.!–as, Additional Government Advocate for
. if ‘RespondentI1~._.V Respondent.2, Respondent.-4 to Respondenté,
“l?.esporrdentL’3s. Served by Paper Publication.)
Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
itt’ie«–.l’Consti.tution of India praying to direct Responder1t.2,
l’A.Respondent.4, Respondent.5 and Respondent.6 to forthwith
‘take all actions in accordance with law against the
” ~’Respondent.3 herein and to prevent the Respondentfi or any
third parties from performing any Poojas in the Sri.Anjaneya
Devaru Temple’, situated at Venkateshpura Village
(Hallipalya), Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalere~64 and from
3
3. The petitioner’s appointment has bee1i.__re11eWlediii
time to time. The petitioner has prejdiiced materfialsito that
he has been drawing Tasdikfin discharge orpaetiessi as an
Archak of the temple. An endolfsetflenpt egieim .2007
to indicate that the petitioner the temple is also
produced. This being the. third–parties
claiming and interested in the
developmem,:oi’::*:heV_i to interfere with the
of the temple and introduced
persons claiming’ to he A.i~ichal<s to perform poojas in the stead
V' __ Ovfifllfisflfllitionerlfl ' ———- -« "
ii _ There. was an earlier instance where one such person
ihadi interfered with the functions of the petitioner and it was
withigreat difficulty that he was removed from the temple. it is
the turn of another third party, who claims as an Archak
.-Thominated by the Trustee-zg who have illegally sought to
management. The alleged inaction on the part of"jthe:"p"foL1rth
respondent is not within the knowledge of the1.lState.::and
appropriate directions may be issuedM'to'en_sL1y_re .;th.ei"'«b_a.nd'obust'
of the temple and the performance of? poojas desiginated».p
Arc hak.
Accordingly, thezwrit pet’itic)n’islallowedf
The fourth respoiident.i’*»~ii’n” parti.ct1lia’r_, is directed to
provide ‘bandoli3ust’ii tofthepp to– ensure that poojas are
performed by the the State Government
and in the ; present’ cas_e,’ ii the petitioner who is presently
appo.i_nted~ theiffioyerynment shall be provided with protection
so that tr.iepiil.’-oojas’ performed without any interference by the
i’third ‘parties stick. as the respondent.
Sd/as
Judge