The Karnataka High Court has come down heavily on the State authorities for continuing construction activities at a disputed temple site in violation of its earlier orders and recorded undertakings, terming such conduct as a clear disregard of judicial authority.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum noted that despite repeated and unequivocal directions restraining the State from undertaking any construction without prior permission of the Court, and a specific undertaking that no permanent structures would be erected, construction activity had continued at the site. The Court observed that judicial orders cannot be reduced to empty formalities and undertakings given to the Court cannot be breached with impunity.
The Court found that the material on record, including photographs, indicated that the construction was of considerable magnitude and could not be treated as minor or temporary. It rejected the State’s justification that the project was intended for the benefit of devotees and funded under a Central scheme, holding that financial sanction cannot override binding judicial directions.
Taking serious note of the conduct of the Deputy Commissioner, the Court directed an immediate halt to all construction activities at the temple premises. It also ordered the officer to file a detailed affidavit within two weeks, furnishing complete accounts of the ₹47 crore allegedly released by the Union Government, including details of expenditure and the status of works undertaken.
The Court further warned that any continued violation of its interim orders or breach of undertakings would be treated as aggravated contempt, warranting strict action. It also noted that the Deputy Commissioner had, in an affidavit, effectively admitted that certain structures executed were of a permanent nature contrary to the assurances given to the Court, an aspect that will be examined at the stage of final hearing.
The matter arises from a writ petition challenging the validity of the Shree Chamundeshwari Kshetra Development Authority Act, 2024, and involves an ongoing dispute over the nature and control of the temple property.
Appearances:
For Petitioner: Sr Adv J Sai Deepak, along with Manasi Kumar
For Union of India: ASG Aravind Kamath.
For State of Karnataka: Sr Adv I. Tharanath Poojary; Sri Devadas, Additional Advocate General