RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTT Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Sri Raghavendra Swamy Mutt is before this Court aggrieved by the order of the respondent-Tahasildar, Gangavathi who has invoked the powers vested under Sec. 144 of the Cr.P.C. enforcing the provisions of Sec. 144 of the Cr.P.C. at the island Nava Brindavana Gadde between 13/7/2022 from 5.00 p.m. to 21/7/2022 till 8.00 a.m.

(2.) It is the contention of the petitioner-Mutt that the devotees of the Mutt intended to perform Aradhana of Sri H.H.Jayatheertharu between 17th to 19th of July, 2022 at the Nava Brindavan Gadde which is within the jurisdiction of the Tahasildar, Gangavathi. However, the petitioner-Mutt made a representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Koppal, seeking Police protection to ensure that there is no disruption of law and order. In the meanwhile, representations were also given by the respondent No.3-Sri Uttaradhi Mutt to the Deputy Commissioner stating that the parties are already in dispute and the matter was pending consideration at the hands of this court in R.S.A. No. 100446/2015. The Deputy Commissioner requested the Assistant Commissioner, Koppal to make an enquiry and submit his report. It appears that the representatives of the two mutts went before the Assistant Commissioner and both the parties appraised the Assistant Commissioner regarding their claims and grievances. The Assistant Commissioner wrote back to the Deputy Commissioner on 5/7/2022 stating that on his assessment, it would not be possible to hold the Aradhana without disrupting the peace and tranquility of public. Following the same, the Deputy Commissioner wrote back to the Assistant Commissioner and the Police Sub Inspector, Gangavati Sub Division that even after trying to resolve the dispute between the two Mutts, it was found that it would not be possible to permit the petitioner-Mutt to hold the Aradhana without disturbing the peace and tranquility. Therefore, it was directed that while permitting the Mutts to carry on their day to day activities as was directed by this Court by several interim orders, appropriate action should be initiated by the authorities to maintain peace and tranquility of the public in the Nava Brindavan area between 14/7/2022 to 20/7/2022. Following the same, the Tahasildar, Gangavathi proceeded to pass impugned order under Sec. 144 of the Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsels Sri K. Suman and Sri Captain Aravind Sharma have made their submission on behalf of the petitioner-Mutt. The learned senior counsels have submitted that several interim orders have been passed by this Court in R.S.A. No. 100446/2015 making arrangements for conducting such Aradhanas at the Nava Brindavan Gadde and therefore the petitioner Mutt would invite similar orders at the hands of this Court making arrangements for conducting aradhana. The learned counsels would submit that although respondent No.3-Uttaradi Mutt had never conducted a Mahimotsava of Sri Raghuvaryaru, nevertheless only with a sinister motive respondent No.3-Uttaradi Mutt proposed to hold Mahimotsava during the same period. Nevertheless it is submitted that if similar arrangements were made by this Court as was made at the earlier occasions permitting both the Mutts to hold the Aradhana, the petitioner-Mutt would be satisfied. It is also submitted that the subsequent developments and the stand taken by the respondent No.3-Uttaradi Mutt clearly shows that the Uttaradi Mutt had no difficulty in holding the Mahimotsava at a different venue and the same was announced in the newspapers. The newspaper clippings are produced before this Court to support the contention of the learned counsels for the petitioner that the respondent No.3-Uttaradi Mutt later decided to hold the Mahimotsava on 14th and 15th at Sri Channabasaveshwara Swamy Kalyana Mantap at Gangavathi and between July 16th to 20th at Hosapete. Therefore, it is submitted that when the respondent No.3-Uttaradhi Mutt had made alternative arrangements to hold the Mahimotsava at a different place, the question of there being any altercations between the devotees would not arise. The statement that was made earlier is reiterated at the hands of the learned counsels for the petitioners that the petitioner-Mutt would welcome the respondent No.3-Uttaradi Mutt to conduct Mahimotsava at the Nava Brindavan Gadde along with the petitioner-Mutt.