Sri.Prashanth Kumar Shetty Araimane Vs the State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri.Prashanth Kumar Shetty Araimane Vs the State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of: (i) petitioner and respondent No.8 given liberty to approach the competent authority to resolve their mutual dispute over the traditional right to receive 'prasada'; (ii) observations in the impugned communication (Annexure-A) affecting the rights of any party held not to be given effect to; (iii) the temporary arrangement for distribution of 'prasada' per Annexure-A to continue until resolution of the dispute.

Issue for consideration

Whether the observations/directions in the impugned communication dated 04.02.2023 (Annexure-A) of respondent No.2-Commissioner — including the indication that the rival group is entitled to receive the 'prasada', made without hearing the petitioner — should be quashed or given no effect. +1 more

Court's answer

Any observations made in the impugned communication at Annexure-A affecting the rights of any of the parties shall not be given effect to.

Ratio / Principle

Till resolution of the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.8, the direction issued in the impugned communication as per Annexure-A to distribute the 'prasada' on a temporary basis shall continue.

Key takeaways

The petitioner as well as respondent No.8 are at liberty to approach the competent authority to resolve their mutual dispute.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 6722 of 2023 (GM-R/C), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (M.G.S. Kamal, J.), decided 08-06-2026: Petitioners sought quashing of the communication dated 04.02.2023 in No. E-925041-HRICEADMOADM1/922/2022 (Annexure-A) issued by the Commissioner, Dept. of Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments (respondent No.2), which directed that distribution of 'prasada' at Mahathobhara Shree Vishweshwara Temple, Yelluru (Kapu Taluk, Udupi District) be made directly to devotees until resolution of the discord between the petitioner and respondent No.8, and which indicated that the rival group was entitled to receive the 'prasada' without the petitioner having been heard. The Court disposed of the petition, placing on record the submissions of counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.8 and the AGA, and made clear that: (i) the petitioner and respondent No.8 are at liberty to approach the competent authority to resolve their mutual dispute; (ii) any observations in the impugned communication at Annexure-A affecting the rights of any of the parties shall not be given effect to; and (iii) till resolution of the dispute, the direction in Annexure-A to distribute the 'prasada' on a temporary basis shall continue.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27096 WP No. 6722 of 2023

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

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

WRIT PETITION NO. 6722 OF 2023 (GM-R/C)

BETWEEN:

SRI.PRASHANTH KUMAR SHETTY ARAIMANE AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O SRI. RATHNAKAR SHETTY ARAIMANE, OCC - AGRICULTURE,

SRI. RATHNAKAR SHETTY ARAIMANE AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, S/O LATE BABU SHETTY, OCC - AGRICULTURE,

BOTH ARE R/AT 'ARAIMANE', YELLURU VILLAGE AND POST, KAPU TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 113.

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

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. PRASANNA V R.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF REVENUE, HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, (HRI AND CE), M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

THE COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, (HRI AND CE), GOVT. OF KARNATAKA,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:27096 WP No. 6722 of 2023

HC-KAR

MINTO ANJANEYA BUILDING, A V ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDUPI DISTRICT, DEPT. OF HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, RAJATADRI, MANIPALA, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 104.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DEPT. OF HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, RAJATADRI, MANIPALA, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 104.

THE TAHSILDAR KAPU TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 106.

THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MAHATHOBHARA SHREE VISHWEHSWARA TEMPLE, YELLURU, YELLURU POST, KAPU TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 113.

THE MANAGING COMMITTEE MAHATHOBHARA SHREE VISHWESHWARA TEMPLE, YELLURU, YELLURU POST, KAPU TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574113, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT.

JAGADISHA ARASA S/O RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS ARASARAMANE KUTHYAR, KAUP TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 116.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R1 TO R6; SRI. VINAYAKA B., ADVOCATE FOR R7; SRI. K. PRASAD HEGDE., ADVOCATE FOR R8)

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27096 WP No. 6722 of 2023

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 04/02/2023 IN NO. E-925041-HRICEADMOADM1/922/2022 ISSUED BY THE R-2 COMMISSIONER, DEPT. OF HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

Short grievance of the petitioners is that by

communication dated 04.02.2023 as per Annexure-A, respondent No.2-Commissioner has directed the tradition of distribution of ''prasada'' to be made directly to the devotees of the subject temple until resolution of the discord between the two groups namely the petitioner and respondent No.8.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

while doing so he has indicated that the rival group are entitled to receive the ''prasada'', which has adversely affected the petitioner as he was not heard before making such observations.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:27096 WP No. 6722 of 2023

HC-KAR

3. In response, learned counsel for the respondent

No.8, who is contesting and claiming prerogative rights submits that if a direction is issued to the respondent No.2Commissioner/Tribunal to determine the dispute between

the petitioner and respondent No.8, as expeditiously as possible with regard to their right to receive the ''prasada'' as per the tradition, grievance of respondent No.8 would also be served.

4. Learned AGA, at this juncture submits that till resolution of the dispute by the Competent Authority, the temporary arrangement of distribution of ''prasada'' as per Annexure-A would continue.

5. Above three submissions are placed on record.

6. Petitioner as well as respondent No.8 are at liberty to approach the competent authority to resolve their mutual dispute.

7. It is made clear that any observations being made in the impugned communication at Annexure-A affecting

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:27096 WP No. 6722 of 2023

HC-KAR

the rights of any of the parties shall not be given effect to.

It is further made clear till resolution of the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.8, the direction issued in the impugned communication as per Annexure-A

to distribute the ''prasada'' on temporary basis shall continue.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20