Disposed

Sri.B.T Jambhu Nagaraj @ B.T. Nagaraj v. the Thasildar

Karnataka HC9 Oct 2024WP/27310/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claiming hereditary Archakship of a temple sought mandamus to consider his representation for permanent appointment. On the State's undertaking, the court disposed of the petition directing consideration within two months and permitted him to continue as Archaka meanwhile.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider the representation (Annexure-J) within two months; petitioner to continue as Archaka till then.

Sri.B.T Jambhu Nagaraj @ B.T. Nagaraj Vs the… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41212 WP No. 27310 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 27310 OF 2024 (GM-R/C)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. B.T JAMBHU NAGARAJ @ B.T. NAGARAJ, S/O. LATE. B.S. THIRUMALACHAR, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT SRI. VENKATARAMASWAMY TEMPLE, OCCUPATION ARCHAK, BENACHAKALLU VILLAGE, HULIYURDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DIST. 572 401.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. PARAMESHWARAPPA M V., ADVOCATE)

¶10

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE THASILDAR, KUNIGAL TALUK, KUNIGAL,TUMKUR DIST. 572 401.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DIST.,-572 401.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR 574 401.

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41212 WP No. 27310 of 2024

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER, THE HINDU RELIGIOUS AND ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, IIND FLOOR, SRI MALE MAHABALESHWARA VARTHA BHAVAN, ALUR VENKATARAO ROAD, CHAMARAJAPET,

¶17

BANGALORE- 560 018.

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE- 560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA)

¶21

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

¶22

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED. 14.06.2023 AS PER ANNX-J AND ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:41212 WP No. 27310 of 2024

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶29

2. Petitioner is seeking the following prayers:

¶30

(a) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondents No.1 to 4 consider the representation dated 14.06.2023 as per Annexure - J.

¶31

(b) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶32

Petitioner claims that his ancestors were the Archaks of Sri Venkataramana Swamy Temple, Benachakallu Village, Huliyurdurga Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakur District. Presently, the post of Archak is devolved

¶33

to the petitioner, after the death of petitioner's father by name Sri. B.S. Thirumalachar and he continues to be the Archaka in respect of the said temple. Further, respondent No.1/Tahsildar has passed an Order on 18.11.2014 vide Annexure-D, permitting the petitioner to continue the

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41212 WP No. 27310 of 2024

¶35

Archakship and even the Deputy Commissioner has passed an Order on 18.10.2014 vide Annexure 'E' to continue the petitioner as the Archaka of the Temple. It is submitted, petitioner has been performing the duties of Archaka since several years, on the basis of the order passed by respondents No.1 to 3. His grievance is that the representation submitted for permanent Archakship of Sri Venkataramana Swamy Temple has not been considered and the same is pending since 14.06.2023.

¶36

Petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus to direct respondents Nos.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 14.06.2023, at Annexure-J.

¶37

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the representation would be considered in accordance with law, if not already considered, within a period of two months from today.

¶38

In the light of the above submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the petition

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41212 WP No. 27310 of 2024

¶40

is disposed of directing the respondents concerned to consider the representation at Annexure 'J', within a period of two months. Till then, the petitioner shall continue as Archaka of Sri Venkataramana Swamy Temple.

¶41

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶42

SNC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 94

Sri.B.T Jambhu Nagaraj @ B.T. Nagaraj v. the Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.B.T Jambhu Nagaraj @ B.T. Nagaraj v. the Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Charan J S Vs State of Karnataka

Sharath Babu L S Vs Smt. Megha

B.C.Nagesh Vs the State of Karnataka by the

Shalimar Incense Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sri Nitin Kanji Shah HUF

Shalimar Incense Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt Savitha Nithin Shah

Shalimar Incense Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt Karina Shah