SAILA JAGADGURU SURYA SIMHASANA PEETADHIPATHI SRIMAD GIRI RAJA SURYA SIMHASANADHEESWARA PANCHA MATHADYAKSHA VAGASA PANDITHARADHYA SIVACHARYA MAHA SWAMIJEE Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Lord Mallikarjuna Swamivari Linga at Srisailam Hills is one of the 12 Jyotirlingas of India and it is one of the three lingas after which our land of Telugus is called Trilinga'. This great Linga which is acclaimed as ' Swayambhu' is held in high reverence by all sects of Hindus all over the country and at its feet Chatrapati Sivaji Maharaja once prayed and worshipped. Its annual income now seems to be around a crore of rupees. Notwithstanding the great sanctity attached to this great shrine and the obeisance regularly made by several thousands of devotees to Lord Mallikarjuna Swamy or probably because of those very reasons, the two ascetics one of Pushpagiri Mutt and the other of Srisaila Jagadguru Surya Simhasana Peethadhipathi, lay their rival claims to the hereditary trusteeship of this great shrine and engage themselves in non-holds-barred legal battles ranging over several decades. Into this arena of long drawn out feuds more worthy to be fought by lesser mortals but being inconclusively waged by the two ascetics, the State Government of Andhra Pradesh, throws its weight purporting to decide that of the two, the Mahant of Pushpagiri Mutt is the hereditary trustee of Srisailam shrine, inviting retaliatory legal action from Surya Simhasana Mutt based not only on grounds of interpretation of the statute but also on charges of mala fide exercise of power levelled against the State Chief Minister and a senior Secretary of the Government.

(2.) The immediate origin of the present dispute can be traced to an application dated 24-6-1974 made by Pushpagiri Mathadhipathi under Section 20 of the Act 17 of 1966. (Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act) to the Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad. In that application, the Pushpagiri Mathadipathi who is the third respondent to this writ petition claimed that as Pushpagiri Peethadipathi he is the hereditary trustee of Srisailam temple. In support of that claim, he stated that from 1841 onwards, Srisailam temple had been under the sole management of Pushapagiri Peethadhipathi, the temple having been handed over to the Pushpagiri Peethadhipathi by the British authorities by about 1841. He quoted the Imperial Gazette of India, Provincial Series, 1908 at page 428, where, the following recital occurs :-

(3.) After the commencement of Act 2 of 1927, the Pushpagin Swamy filed an application under Section 84 of that Act for a declaration that the temple of Srisailam was an 'excepted temple. After an enquiry, the H.R.E. Board, by its order dated 8-1 -1932 declared the Srisailam temple as an 'excepted temple' for the purpose of the 1st Act. The word 'excepted temple' as defined under the 1st Act meant a temple the right of succession to the Office of trustee or office of the Trustees thereof, has been hereditary or the succession of the trusteeship whereof, has been provided for by the founder.