LAKSHMINARAYANA ASRANNA Vs. K GANANATHA SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this appeal is preferred against the order dated 4th november, 1992 passed by the learned single judge in writ petition No. 17435 of 1992. The first respondent in this appeal was the petitioner in the writ petition. He sought for quashing the order dated 7-6-1992 passed by the commissioner for religious and charitable endowments, Bangalore in No. Adm 8 msc cr mokkam 5:92-93 placing him under suspension in exercise of powers under Section 45 of the Madras hindu religious and charitable endowments Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') and appointing the assistant commissioner for hindu religious and charitable endowments, mangalore, as the administrator of the temple.

(2.) learned single judge has allowed the writ petition on the ground that the commissioner has acted arbitrarily in placing the first respondent under suspension. Sri padubidri raghavendra rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the order dated 7-6-1992 - Annexure a to the writ petition - gives all the details of the misconduct committed by the petitioner in the writ petition, and, on that basis, the commissioner was entitled to place him under suspension pending enquiry. It is also submitted that the order also contains the charges framed against the first respondent-petitioner in the writ petition, therefore as per Section 45 of the act the commissioner was well within his power in placing the first respondent under suspension and hence the said order ought not to have been interfered with. Section 45 (3) of the act reads thus:

(3.) it is in these circumstances, the learned single judge has characterised the order as the one passed arbitrarily. Hence, we see no ground to interfere with the same.