Disposed¶6

Sri.K.G. Govindaiah v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Feb 2026WP/16895/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: mandamus; Articles 226 and 227; Section 92 CPC; O.S.No.1/1984; Chandramouleswara Swamy Temple Koratagere; scheme of management; Committee of management; Assistant Commissioner as trustee; encroachment removal; Abdul Razak (respondent No.5); Deputy Commissioner Tumkuru; representation dated 17.08.2022 Annexure-H; Tahsildar notice 11.12.2023; locus standi; disposed of. Relevant for: temple trust administration under a Section 92 CPC scheme, refusal of writ directions where a management committee exists, and encroachment complaints routed through revenue authorities.

What did the court decide?

Since a scheme of management is settled and a Committee of management which also includes the Assistant Commissioner is in place, the Court concurred with learned AGA that it is for the Committee to take the matter forward in the manner known to law.

Sri.K.G. Govindaiah Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether a mandamus should issue directing respondent No.2, Deputy Commissioner, Tumkuru District, to consider the petitioners' representation dated 17.08.2022 (Annexure-H) and take action against respondent No.5 regarding the encroachment over the property of Chandramouleswara Swamy Temple, Koratagere. +1 more

¶1

Court's answer

No direction at the instance of the petitioners is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the matter.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

¶5

Key takeaways

Taking on record learned AGA's submission that the necessary action in the matter would be initiated by the Committee which is in place, the Court disposed of the petition.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 16895 of 2023 (GM-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (M.G.S. Kamal J), oral order dated 03.02.2026 — disposed of. Petitioners, who had instituted O.S.No.1/1984 under Section 92 CPC against the then trustees of Chandramouleswara Swamy Temple, Koratagere — a suit that was decreed and resulted in a scheme of management formulated by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkuru, with the Assistant Commissioner as one of the Trustees — sought a mandamus to the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkuru District, to act on their representation dated 17.08.2022 (Annexure-H) for action against respondent No.5 (Abdul Razak) for alleged encroachment of Temple property. Learned AGA submitted that the Tahsildar had already issued notice on 11.12.2023 and that, a Committee of management being in place, the petitioners had no locus standi. The Court held that, the scheme being settled and the Committee of management (including the Assistant Commissioner) in place, the Committee itself is required to take the matter forward in the manner known to law and no direction at the petitioners' instance was warranted; taking on record the AGA's submission that necessary action would be initiated by the Committee, the petition was disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:6154 WP No. 16895 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 16895 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI.K.G. GOVINDAIAH S/O SANJEEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,

¶11

R/AT SETTIBANAJIGAR, ABHINAV ELECTRICAL STORES MAIN ROAD, KORATAGERE TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 132.

¶12

SRI. H.V.VEERANNA S/O HULIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT THARIAMBAKESHWARA TANK COLONY, KORATAGERE TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 132.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

(BY SRI. K.N. NITISH., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K V NARASIMHAN.,ADVOCATES)

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR -571 129.

¶19

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

¶20

¶21

NC: 2026:KHC:6154 WP No. 16895 of 2023

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

MADUGIRI SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 132.

¶24

TAHSILDAR KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 129.

¶25

ABDUL RAZAK, S/O ABDUL MUNAF, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, BHARATH CORK INDUSTRIES, GERAHALLI, KORAHOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT,. TUMKUR - 572 129.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA., AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AT ANNEXURE-H DATED 17/08/2022 AND TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE R5.

¶29

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

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

Petitioners are before this Court seeking issue of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent No.2, Deputy Commissioner, Tumkuru District to consider their representation dated 17.08.2022 produced at

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:6154 WP No. 16895 of 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Annexure-H, in which they have sought for action to be taken against respondent No. 5.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioners taking this Court

¶38

through the record submits that petitioners herein had originally initiated the proceedings in O.S.No.1/1984 filed under Section 92 of the CPC against the then trustees' of Chandramouleswara Swamy Temple, Koratagere. The said suit came to be decreed, in furtherance to which, a scheme of management has been formulated by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkuru, in which the Assistant Commissioner is also one of the Trustees. He further submits that since in the interregnum, the Assistant Commissioner was assigned with the responsibility of managing the affairs of the Temple who had also given undertaking before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkuru, prior to finalisation of the scheme to remove the encroachment over the property belonging to the

¶39

Temple but till date no action has been taken. Therefore, petitioners who are interested in the affairs of Administration of the said Temple have filed the present petition seeking direction to respondent No. 2 to take action in the matter.

¶40

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:6154 WP No. 16895 of 2023

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

In response, learned AGA submits that the Tahsildar

¶44

has already issued notice on 11.12.2023 and further action will be initiated in accordance with law. She further submits that since a Committee of management is in place, petitioners who have no say in the Administrative affairs of the committee, do not have any locus standi in the matter. Hence, she seeks for dismissal of the petition.

¶45

Heard. Perused the records.

¶46

Petitioners who had initiated the proceedings, under Section 92 of CPC as noted above which culminated in the settlement of scheme are seeking direction to the respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner to remove the encroachment allegedly made by respondent No.5. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that since the proceedings were initiated by them, petitioners are only interested in seeing the logical conclusion is reached to the process which they had set in motion. Since a scheme of management is settled, a Committee of management which also includes Assistant Commissioner is in place, as rightly pointed out by learned AGA, the committee is required to take action further in the

¶47

¶48

NC: 2026:KHC:6154 WP No. 16895 of 2023

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

matter in the manner known to law. As such, direction at the instance of petitioners in the facts and circumstances of the matter is not warranted.

¶51