The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the records and on examination of the same and set aside/quash the order impugned 12.3.2021 passed by the Commissioner Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments. The Court observed that the finding of facts howsoever erroneous cannot be the ground for a deeper examination of the decision of statutory authorities unless they go to the very root of the matter.
Brief Facts:
Petitioner No.1 is the son and Petitioner No.2 is the widow of one Mr. Rangaswamy who met his Maker on 19.04.2020. They are knocking at the doors of writ court seeking quashment of 2nd Respondent-Commissioner’s order dated 12.03.2021, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-C whereby he has favoured appeal of the private respondents and thereby set aside the Deputy Commissioner’s order dated 24.10.2017.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that there is no due application of mind by the Commissioner to the argued case of his clients in defense of the Deputy Commissioner’s order and in resistance of the appeal against the same; the Commissioner has misconstrued the order dated 19.02.2007 made by the Assistant Commissioner.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondents made submissions in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which it has been constructed. It was contended that the impugned order is consistent with the Rule of Primogeniture, namely the preferential right of the ‘First Born’ since the matter relates to pooja rights of persons.
The Court noted that the Commissioner has recorded a finding that the 7th Respondent- P. S. Swarna Raj happens to be a hereditary Archaka of the 6th Respondent-Temple. In fact, the inquiry held by the Revenue Inspector with the participation of the villagers resulted in a report being submitted on 24.01.2020 recommending the case of answering respondents herein. The report also holds that the allegations of immoral conduct leveled against the said respondents are baseless and that the same has been made by the members of the erstwhile committee of management of the temple only with ulterior motives.
The Court observed that where a statutory/Tribunal makes an order in the admitted jurisdiction, the challenge lies only under Article 227 of the Constitution which is too restrictive, Article 227 has been ornamentally employed in the writ petition. The finding of facts howsoever erroneous cannot be the ground for a deeper examination of the decision of statutory authorities unless they go to the very root of the matter.
The Court said that the learned AGA appearing for the official respondents is right in pointing out that the validity of a statutory order has to be adjudged on the basis of the reasons assigned therein and that no other reasons can be imported from outside.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court, dismissing the petition, held that this petition is devoid of merits.
Case Title: R Harish & Anr. vs The State of Karnataka & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Krishna S Dixit
Case no.: WRIT PETITION NO. 7355 OF 2021 (GM-R/C)
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Krishnamoorthy D.
Advocate for the Respondents: Ms. Navya Shekhar
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
