Case Note & Summary
The case involved three writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by petitioners seeking to challenge orders related to their applications for appointment as Pujaris in temples governed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. The petitioners contended that their ancestors had served as Pujaris and that they had been performing the role since 2007 and 2014. They submitted applications to the second respondent through the third respondent, who instead of forwarding the applications, issued an order rejecting them. The petitioners argued that this action was without jurisdiction and sought to quash the orders. The respondents, represented by the Government Advocate, contended that the applications were based on succession, which is not permissible under Section 55(2) of the HR & CE Act. The court analyzed the submissions and found that the third respondent, not being the appointing authority, should have forwarded the applications to the second respondent. The court concluded that the rejection by the third respondent was invalid and directed the second respondent to consider the applications on their merits within eight weeks. The writ petitions were partially allowed, and no costs were imposed.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Jurisdiction of Authority - Competence of Authority - Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, Section 55(2) - The third respondent acted beyond jurisdiction by not forwarding the petitioners' applications to the second respondent, who is the competent authority for appointment. The court held that the rejection by the third respondent was invalid as he was not the appointing authority, necessitating interference with the impugned orders (Paras 8-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the orders passed by the third respondent and the first respondent were without jurisdiction and whether the petitioners' applications for appointment as Pujaris should have been forwarded to the second respondent.
Final Decision
The court partially allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned orders, and directed the second respondent to consider the petitioners' applications on their merits within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
- jurisdiction
- appointment based on succession
- Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act
- 1959
- Section 55(2)
- competent authority
