SHILPI PAPACHAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a devotee is before me and is questioning in his personal capacity the order at Annexure-A dated 18-2-2000 passed by the respondent. The facts in brief are as under : the petitioner has allegiance to dhafmadarshi of Papagni Math (for short the Math ). It is a religious institute working for the welfare of Vishwakarma community of Hindu Religion. Vishwakarma community are engaged in the handicrafts of Goldsmith in addition to sculpture and other activities. The Math is in existence over 1000 years, according to the petition averments. There are several idols and Samadhi of the previous Swamijis of their sect. Their main god is Bhoganandhishwara. The diety is worshipped by Vishwakarma devotees. The math did not have religious head like swamiji either for preaching or religious activities. There is no history of Mathadhipathi of this institution. The third respondent, keshavachar belongs to Vishwakarma community. According to the petitioner, he misused his position as Religious Endowments commissioner and got the fifth respondent appointed as the Peethadhipathi of the Math. The petitioner states that the Government cannot appoint any Swamiji and the Government has no power, what so ever. He also makes allegation against the third respondent. It is unnecessary for me to refer to these allegations in the light of an order of this court on 12-6-2000. The third respondent in terms of an order is deleted. The only question that remains for consideration is with regard to the right of the State Government to appoint of Peetadhipathi to a Math.

(2.) NOTICE was issued and the respondents have entered appearance. The contesting respondent has filed a detailed affidavit opposing the petition. He states that from time immemorial, several Swamijis were in charge of the Math activities. Yogis and mathadipathis were patronized by all members of Vishwakarma community. Sri veerabhghacharya and Sri Papamambadevl were presiding over the Math, earlier. The petitioner has referred to the history of the math in the petition. The respondent also refers to the appointment of a Committee by the Government in the year 1985. According to the respondent, a Committee was appointed with the Tahsildhar as a Treasurer. The Development Committee, the local public and the devotees held a meeting on 26-6-1999 and passed a resolution with regard to the appointment of peethadyaksha of papagni Math. The petitioner was present and he was a party to the resolution of the meeting. Thereafter, the Government has chosen to issue the present order. The State governmnt has not filed any Counter.

(3.) HEARD the Counsel. Sri P. Srintvasaiah, learned counsel essentially questions the power of the Government in the matter of appointment. The Counsel says that no powers are vested with the Government in the matter of appointment. He refers to Chapter VIII, Succession of Gurus to Mathas in this regard in terms of the impugned order.