Supreme Court of India
SRI KANYAKA PARAMESWARI ANNA SATRAM COMMITTEE AND ORS. ETC. versus THE COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS CHARITABLE AND ENDOWMENTS AND ORS. ETC.
- Decided
- 27 March 1997
- Judges listed
- K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK
Citations
- Official
- [1997] 3 S.C.R. 402 · 1997 INSC 331
- Also cited as
- (1999) 7 SCC 666
Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.
Cited by
Cited in 1 other Supreme Court judgment we hold.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
CA Nos. 1340/86, 8535/94 & CA No. 2718/97 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.
p. 402, margin H
Delay condoned and leave granted in the special leave petitioners. Application for intervention is dismissed.
p. 403, margin A
The controversy raised in this apveal is covered by the judgment of this Court is S1i Adi Visheshwara of Kashi Vishwanath Temple, Varanasi & Ors. v. 171e State of U.P. & Ors, [1997] 3 SCALE 1.
p. 403, margin A
In the present case, the appellants - Satrarn Committee claimed the status of as a denominational temple under Article 26( d) of the Constitution. The High Court has held that they have the denominational status, but, nonetheless, it was negatived on the ground that the Managing Cornrnittee would be appointed with non-official and official members under the A.P. Charitable and Religious Institutions Endowment Act. Thus, the appellants claimed the status of a denominational one and the Government has questioned the later direction. Admittedly, the Arya Vysya Community is having as many as 102 gotras. In other words, they are representing as large segment of Hindus worshipping Goddess Matha Kanyakapararneswari. In the above cited case, the claim was that the Hindus who worship God Shiva constitute a denominational section entitled to the benefit of Articles 26(b) and 26( d) of the Constitution. A Bench of three Judges, to which both of us were members, had considered the matter in detail and held that Hindu Worshippers of God Shiva are not a denominational section and, therefore, they are not entitled to the benefit' of Articles 26(b) and 26( d) of the Constitution for management of the temples. Following the above ratio, we hold that the Hindu sections of the Arya Vysya Community who worship Goddess Matha Kanyakapararneswari are not denominational section for the purpose of Articles 26(b) and 26( d) of the Constitution. As a consequence, it is an institution covered by the provisions of the Endowments Act Accordingly, they are entitled to be administered in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Pannalal Bansilal Patti & Ors. v. State of A.P., [1996] 2 SCC 498.
p. 403, margin B
The appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs. C4 No. 1341/86
p. 403, margin E
Following the above ratio, this appeal is allowed. No costs. T.N.A. C.A. Nos. 1340/86, 2718/97 and 8535/94 dismissed and C.A. No.1341/86 allowed.
p. 403, margin G