A view of the High Court of Karnataka. File
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
The High Court of Karnataka has restrained the State Government from taking any action or decision under Section 16 and 17 of the Shree Chamundeshwari Kshetra Development Authority Act, 2024, without the prior permission of the Court.
The Section 16 empowers the Chief Minister, who is the ex-officio chairperson of the authority under the new Act, to take decisions, without holding meeting of the authority but by mere circulation of the subject among the members. And Section 17 authorises the chairman to pass orders in urgent cases without holding a meeting or circulating subject matter amongst the members but take post-facto approval by placing such orders before the meeting of the authority subsequently.
Justice Hemant Chandangoudar passed the interim Order on October 15 on the petition filed by Pramoda Devi Wadiyar of erstwhile royal family of Mysore, who has challenged the constitutional validity of the Act.
Court continues its earlier interim Order
Meanwhile, the Court continued its earlier interim Order of not to alienate any immovable and movable property belonging to Chamundeshwari temple.
Also, the Court recorded the undertaking given on behalf of the State that “the prevailing customs and traditions of the temple will not be modified or interfered with during the pendency of the petition.”
“Authority is at liberty to take decisions”
However, the Court clarified that the pendency of the petition will not preclude the Government from framing appropriate Rules under the Act, 2024.
Additionally, the Court said that the Authority constituted under the Act, 2024 is directed to serve notice of any meetings to the petitioner. In the event that the petitioner, despite being duly served with notice, chooses not to attend or participate in the proceedings, the Authority is at liberty to take decisions in accordance with the provisions of the Act, 2024.
Master plan will be prepared for Chamundeshwari temple’s development, says Siddaramaiah
Petitioner’s claims
Ms. Wadiyar, who is a legal descendant of the royal family, has contended that the State legislature lack jurisdiction to enact this law and the Act is violative of Articles 13 (laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights), 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion), 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) and 29 (protection of interests of minorities) of the Constitution of India.
It has also been contended that the Government could not have enacted the law as a writ appeal filed way back in 2001 by petitioner’s husband [late Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wadiyar] is pending for adjudication before a division Bench of the High Court. The appeal was filed against the 20011 judgment of a single judge, who had upheld the Government’s order of taking more than 25 temples, including Chamundeshwari temple, which were with the royal family the, under the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Department. Further hearing on the petition has been adjourned till November 22.
Published – October 19, 2024 01:45 pm IST
