K S NARAYANA IYENGAR Vs. LOCAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has called into question the first respondent's order, dated 31.3.2012 (Annexure -K) requiring the four Sthaniks to be present on the day on which the jewellery is to be carried from the District Treasury to the Melukote Cheluvanarayanaswamy Temple on account of Vyramudi Brahmothsava and at the time of returning it to the District Treasury on the next day. He has also challenged the third respondent's order, dated 12.12.2012 (Annexure -T), which states that the Sthaniks' signatures are not necessary, as the protection of the precious jewellery is the responsibility of the officials. It further states that, as per the Temple Manual, the Sthaniks can come not to exercise their rights but only to assist the offices.

(2.) SRI V.Srinivas Raghavan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for over 35 years, the petitioner in his capacity as Sthanik No.1, has been bringing the jewellery from the District Treasury to the Temple and has been returning the same to the District Treasury once the ceremony was got over. In this regard, he brings to my notice the memos, dated 17.2.1976 (Annexure -A), 3.11.2000 (Annexure -B), the letter, dated 11.3.2003 (Annexure -C), etc.

(3.) SRI Srinivas Raghavan submits that the impleading applicant has no right to associate himself with the exercise of bringing the jewellery and returning the jewellery. He submits that the impleading applicant had filed Writ Petition No.4143/2008 (Annexure -J) agitating his right to carry the jewellery from the District Treasury to the Temple on the day of Vyramudi festival. This Court, by its order, dated 24.11.2009 disposed of the writ petition holding that the disputed questions of facts cannot be agitated in the proceedings under Section 226 of the Constitution of India.