": 2
IN THE HIGH COURT op' KARNATAKA AT BANG. j§'.-¢;)I2_ .€
DATED THIS THE 13*}: DAY op JULY' féééé .
PRESENT' _
THE HGNBLE MR. RD. ::):NA»13<A§;AN; C:ei_iEei«*;IU"fsf1?§c;%:_A'
THE I-ION'BLE MR.J{i'sfi§:cE v;'G.'$A_:B :Hm;T
WRIT;§PP§Ez5;I, gé.€5.:'1.2%§§;g;f0o9 H N
BETWEEN; 'V "
1 sRI.Tré.INGA?¥A."'«V.,_ .
Sm UD;3'x'S..¥_ RANGA*:AH'
*.')c:»:: A@R1cjuLm1"<<1S*r
R; 912' THWPUR VILLAGE,
KAS2*J3fawH(f)B'LI
FQUBEITALUKV
,_ r1fL;zxej1i<;UR mist-'i'R; KVVEMPAIM
simzrj mm BY ms ms
{A} ~f7.':(}BI)A KEMPAIAI»;
.. 3/0 KEMPANNAJAIAH
'=--o(:(: AGRICULTURISF
R] OF THEPPUR VILLAGE
KASABA HGBLI, GU88! TALUK
'i'UME{UR DIS'¥'R§C'I'
BKEHANDRAIAH
S] O KEMPANANJAIAH
GCC AGRICULTURXST
E] OF THIPPUR VILLAGE-
KASABA HOBLI,
GU33: TALUK : '
TUMKUR I}iSi'R§C'}"
3 SHIVANNA
3/0 SOMASAH
R/OFTHEPPUR VILLAGE"-._ --
KASABA Ho3I..~1',.__ * '
(}UBBi'I'ALUK _ ._
TUMKUR D:s'rR:c.';*'
4 KEMPAMMA ¢ I
SINCE Diem) 8?? HER LES "
A} si1:>'aAmz;.A *
D/Q. KEF€¢_IPAMMA'~v."_' ', "
0cC";§sfm ICULTUR1sT --
R; OF TH§PPUR VI_L"L~AC}E
'K,ASABA..H'QVBLf,"
GU.Ij3B{ TALUK "
TUMi{.uRI:';zs'§":RzCr .....APPELLAm's
é Sri :"}."}&R Af$3§N"I3EESWARA )
WATE Oi? KARNATAKA
VREPRESENTEQ BY ITS SECRETARY
* V'-RELIGIGUS AND CHARITAELE
~ V ENDOWMENTS,
'M S B{;;m1NG
vI9HA1~éA VEEDH:
BANGALQRE-02
:22 THE COMMISSIONER HINER} RELIGIOUS
ANS CHARFFABLE ENDGWMENTS,
GHAMARAJPET,
BANGALORE'.
3 POOJAIAH _
S/O NANJAIAH "
SINCE DEAD BY ms LRS . ~
A)VENKA'1'ALAKSHMAMMA?__ '
w/0 POOJAIAH, * '
AGED 65 YEARS
000 ARCHAKA OF .
UDASALAM=i\/£&«"I§}EV1 -A
B) SIBDAMMA ._ .
D/C) POQ_JAIAH_... % V
DCCAiT€--C}I%AK
UBAS;*\LAjMI\*iA'DEiVI '-
4 KE}a4?;3§A_H * " .' V
31.9 "s%ANM. .KEMPAIA§-1... ,
SINC'i';*DEA3D 13Y=;:11s_1,9s
3..AA)'--SANNP§KEVMPA1A'P£ '
:;::;CsLA1'§; K:3MPA,1AH~"
oix: PLRCHAK c31f«"_.~
, _ UDA'S3ékLA.MMA DEV?
Af3~ED ABQUT40 YEARS
_ ;3}S3.I4DDAPPA
_ ~;~3;o'*L.A*rg KEMPAIAH
EABOUT 35 YEARS
QCGARCHAKA 0;?
..LrmSALAMMA DEVI. RESPONBENTS
{By~~ssx'-3;: ; G GACHCHENAMATH, ma R3.
' .. SRIEASAVARAJ KAREBDY GA FOR R: AND 2" )
THES WRIT APPEAL IS FILED {HS 4 :3? THE
KARNATAKA Hm»: comm' AC'? PRAYING TO SET ASISE
frag 03332:? mssm IN THE wan' pmmom
rmgsgo/2008 DATED 27/02/2009.
This Writ Appeal comirzg up for Prciiminary Healing on
this day, SAB}-iAHfT J., dciivenitd the following.
JUDGMENT
This appea} is filed by zwespoz1deI1t$j”‘;3«’ A’ in
W.P.No.9590/2008 being aggrieved
27.2.2009 wherein the learned df ‘
allowed the Writ petitioxz qua$31_é<§ the 1 §51':1Vé:'1""
and further oréered that .2'z§* –i'h£*:. ;"\1V3;Vtl3oz'itics
earlier, the pariias to the pooja
in thfi" H ii:-§r3'ra1";i¢':V)»I1. t
Resp§7n§3i¢nis«_ 3fT%%-:2§V.& B) and 4 (A 55 B} herein filed
WP,N0.9L59O']2QQ8AA::g{ié};§fz1g fer quashizxg of the mder dated
pas§e<i——by the secand n::spondeI1t—-C0mm3lssi0ner,
V and Charitaiaict Endownzents, Bangalore. it
.' Ais " avéIi4ii?ij1 in the writ pefition that petitioners and
mfipoizgiéfits 3 to 6 are the Archaks of Sziudasalamma Devi
'L V. Théppur Viflaga, Kasaba Hobli, Gnbbi Taluk, Tumkur
Siéuict. Sincfi from the fime of the ancestors of the _
" pefitioners and respondents 3 to 6, the petitioxmrs and the
respendents 3 to 5 are worshipping the said cicity on the
yeariy ro'£atio11 basis. The pefifio9ers__and_–'f1ie _
to 6 are personafly cultivating ti::.¢ .
Sy.No.113 measuring 5 ac1e_s'«-22 giintss sitié{éiie§;1v.z§;tVV'l_5hi1speL1i:"L'
village, Kasaha I-Iobii, Ilistrici.
Respondents 3 to 6 _pc§fit§eisixs'1ski{1g undue advantage
of the innocence of to dis%:urb the '
peaceful ti;é'V.'ivc1*'shippiI1g of the deity
during A in the year 1999 ané
;)e1:ifivos'er':sA " file an appeal before the
Assig£ag§:'– V Tumkur. The Assistant
Cernmissfiigzer ' V. the famiiy genea1€;tg*, after
aspects of the ease and also {he
Land ma} eviéence held that the petitioners and
:es§:'fi;gdTents 3 to 6 are enfitleci to Worship on yeariy
rotaiieiz basis and further they are also entitled to ctlitivate
V' iand in accoxdance with the respective shaxes. Aggxieveci
by the said order, respondents 3 to 6 flied appeal befcre the
Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur. The Deputy Commissioner,
'I'um},(ur, dismissefi the appeal. After verifying the elder of
L?
6
the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Comteissinner,
the Tahsildar, Gubbi gassed order permitt§ng_
and the respondents to worship the S-ai.o:1… yeailyet
rotation basis, The Tahsileiar has! else A’g1~g:e’:; t
to maintain. the order of warship enfeariy bégsis ”
the petitioners and respondents» 3 to §3.~. eggneved by
the said order, Iespendenteég ._6: “ii1ed before the
second respondent and ~t-the t’V’s’e«;:ond_:Z’1ese¢.ndent passed an
ordeze approach the eivii court.
Respeufients 3._teA:_:6.’tfileei”«(‘}’.S.No.Q 12/95 on the file of Civil
Judge (.,¥”r:ul’3n.:V.} permanent injuxxetion and the suit
i,;1j_s:32issec1tV«en'”V4.6w2O{)5. The judgment and decree
V 4VO.eS_.’_No.212/96 has attained finality as no appea}
against the said judgment ané decree.
Respenxdent No.2 without veriifizing all these aspects of the
i.e. the order of the Tahsildar, orzier ef the Assistant
fC’.ommissioner, order ef the Deputy Commissioner and
judgment made in Q.S.NG.212/96, order iaasseci by the
Tahsildar giving police preteetion, record of rights which
\)’
stands in the name of the
Ittspondents; 3 to 6 has strangely?-gaasvscdji’
rcjecfing the claim of _V petiiipiicrs 1
respondents 3 to 6 alone ion yearly
rotation basis IeavinVg r;fi.t_ “aggrieved by
the same, writ Apei:itio;;..is:.*–;£::hat the said order
is co1:1£:ra1’yfV the judgment and
decree ‘fespO1’ld€I1tS 3 to 6 in
_ is unsustainable and
petit:i;)’13§:;r;s- 3 to 6 are entitled to Worship
t1::¢’:wit5r§r; 1§€Ji£1.{;%01fi.;’- V
V. ‘i”‘hy._=: Singlrt Judge after heann’ g the iearned
for the petitioners and the learned
AC.–I)_i1I1$(:i for resgaondents 3, 5 and 6(A) by order
AA ;iatédV_. ;27.2.20O9 held that the order of the Assistant
V’ ‘VC£§Ai>3missi0ncr, Deputy Commissioner and the: Tahsildar in
the earlier groceedings before the same parties would Show
that petitioners and mspofidents 3 to 6 were pexmitizd to
worshig by mtafien. {).S.Nt).212/96 was filed by zespandents
\?’
3 to 6 clairning that they are the poojaries of
and petitioners herein should be
with the pexfonnance of pooja in the Id
suit, it was held that Iespondénigs 3 ;i1:.d’
the said suit have no £:xc11.1siv_{§:__VVi’ight;._»_to pfifoml the worship
in the temple and ‘ad{:c1t£_inggi3%, ‘4 dismissed and
therefore, the osdcr of SccG;1d_ rdtxspgfiiitiédnt is conaazy to
the judgmefifiv ‘f311t’:.{E;i’Ee:: 13}; Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.)
Gubbi’aridd.z§c§,1rIiéf:~§prdée§édingé[‘éaiinot be sustained and the
oxderidigécdting igéigdhfespafidents 3 to 6 to perfonn
the poojd on rotafion was restored by tha
V. If3_5;?3I3’?.1€E(1:v. Sjng1eh”JL1.d.gc and accordingiy, writ f.}€’tifiOI1 was
‘ the impugned order. Being aggrieved by
“fi:iev~’séa:d dated 27.2.2009, respozldents 3 to 6 have
appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for
V’ H @116 apgseiiants, learncd counsel appearing fer respondents
3(A and B) and 4 {A and B) and tbs learmizd Government
Advocate: appearing for mspczzndents 1 and 2. There was
0*
daiay of one day in filing the appeal and -‘;1»tv=’:”enV bb
condoned by separate older.
5. Lcarxled counse1V»[.a@}_:;peaIii:igV__ £111:
submitted that the seco11Ad…VVi:t<;spe1;de1.1't" was Hjéilsiiififtd in
setting aside the ordéf' .i§6fiffi.0ncrs alse along
with mspondezfx-Nsv_.3 tqfi; to perform the
pooja on might to have been
ciisr£ii§.S'.f::.(i~''~~/.Vi:-. ;'_ '' " " " V'
for respondants 3 and 4
submitté:'i<–..that c'1f€1e;-~'Lpassed by thc: learned Single: Judge
is ji;stji'"ied.
V’ ” 1 ‘v;+I;vé::a§1:ri,d Govemmsnt Advocate arguad in support: of
by tha lcarned Single Judge.
~ We have considered the contentions of the learned
A f_” Véfiiunsel appearing for the parties and scrufiniseii the
Vfmatexiai on record.
v’
10
9. The material on record Wojtxld cicarlyliiishoifir vthai »
the earlier proceedings the Tahsiidar
the basis of the order passed the” AS”sista2.1£’ *
and the Deputy Commissioner’ eetieioncrs and
respondents 3413′) 6′ the on yearly
rotatioa, thereafier, filed a suit in
O,S.No.2}2/96″*«:oi1 (Jr.Dn.) Gzlbbi,
claiming Véeido Vsuit are the exclusive
poojairieévor ‘t;u1ieVV’§iflefenda:a1s ifi the suit-writ
petitioi}erS.’_ in ‘Z: petition have no right to
perform corztention of respondents 3 to 6
V. h2;fs*.’3’«:be,e:1 xgegafiveu.—–§;’1 the said suit and the judgment and
‘ ;;7Iee:?eev.;§$é*1s:see:i’i1:1 the said suit has become final Despite the
an& the judgment anti decree passed in the
s13i4f}’g::ii:1i1§§gf that respondents 3 to 6 have 110 exclusive right
.. ‘to’ the pooja by the inclusion of the petitioners, the
‘he:-eeohilfi respondent has passed the impugied order fiated
” ‘}[1.6.2OU8 permitting nesponcients 3 to 6 to perforxn the
gooja 01:2 yearly mtatiozii excluding the Wrét petitioners ané
K/”
11
therefore, having Iegand t0 the above sai€i”féief;s, cL~:ee~’ ; a
that the impugned order is
set aside and could not be (mier L’
passed by the learned Single petition
and setting aside ” __a11d dimcting the
Authorities to the like pooja in the
temple on is Anot suffer from any
error or in this infra court
appeal.” there is no merit in this
appeaieamr:1″d. order:
‘ The wfit’ is dismissed,
-4 sd/-
Chief Justice
Sd/-
JUDGE
I;1(iex:Yes/No
Web Host: Yes/N0