VASUDEVA ASRANNA AND ORS. Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claim to be hereditary archaks of Shri Durga Parameshwari Temple, Kateel. The temple is said to be one of the ancient and revered institutions where large number of devotees perform diverse sevas to Lord Durga Parameshwari. One such seva is performance of marriage in the temple. It is claimed that this seva was being performed since time immemorial.

(2.) The petitioners contend that Shri Durga Parameshwari Temple is one of the ancient Hindu temples in Dakshina Kannada District. This is situated in the middle of a river and is a very sacred place for Hindus. Legend has it that the Goddess slew the dreaded Raksasas, Shumbha and Nishumbha and later she vanquished Arunasura. To kill Arunasura, Devi had taken the form of a huge furious bee, that is 'Bhramara and had stung him repeatedly till his last breath. Thereafter, on the prayers of Devas and the sages, the Devi emerged in Soumyaroopa in the middle of the river Nandini and is known as Shree Durga Parameshwari to whom the temple is dedicated. One of the beliefs amongst the devotees is that any dosha which had delayed the marriage would be remedied by performing certain sevas at the temple and therefore it is not uncommon that devout Hindus take a owe to perform marriages in the temple as a seva. This seva is being performed since times immemorial. In the marriages performed at the temple, there are two types - one is by exchange of garlands before the deity and another is marriage by agnisakshi, that is by performing Homa in the temple. Both these types of marriages are covered by the marriage seva and the type of marriage in each case is decided by the devotees concerned depending upon their family customs and beliefs.

(3.) The learned Government Advocate seeking to support the statement of objections filed in this case, would contend that since a large number of devotees visit the temple, performance of marriages by erecting a temporary stage in front of or inside the temple premises would create congestion and serious hardship to the devotees and there is hence a decision had been taken to do away with the practice of performing marriages inside the premises of the temple. This is wholly in keeping with law and order situation. The ancient traditions and customs as pleaded by the petitioners are besides point. Therefore, it is restricted to allowing the couples to exchange garlands alone on collection of seva fee. There is no illegality in the said decision. The contention that the State has no power under Sec. 77 of the 1997 Act, to appoint a Development Committee is also not sustainable and therefore seeks to sustain the impugned order.