Datta Peetha Shrine Worship Rights Dispute| Supreme Court Orders Karnataka Govt. to Resolve Issues Within 8 Weeks

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Given the sensitivity of the issue, the CJI decided to extend the deadline for the state government to reconsider its decision and present the updated report to the court.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has given a warning to the Karnataka government, urging it to quickly resolve the ongoing dispute about worship rights at a shrine in the state that is important to both Hindus and Muslims.

The court has granted the state eight more weeks to decide on the issue, calling this the “last opportunity” to reach a conclusion. The shrine in question is the Dattatreya Peeta, also known as Guru Dattatreya Baba Budangiri Swamy Dargah, located in Chikkamagaluru.

A bench consisting of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan was hearing the appeal against the Karnataka High Court’s decision, which had overturned the state government’s 2018 decision to allow only a Mujawar (Muslim priest) to perform rituals at the Datta Peeta.

The High Court’s division bench, led by Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A. Patil, dismissed the appeals against the ruling of a single bench that had set aside the state government’s decision, stating that it violated the rights of both communities guaranteed under Article 25 of the Indian Constitution.

During today’s hearing, the state’s counsel informed the bench:

“As far as the shrine is (concerned), the Hindus are being led by a Hindu Pujari and for the Muslims, a Mujawar is taking care of the Muslim rituals.”

Given the sensitivity of the issue, the CJI decided to extend the deadline for the state government to reconsider its decision and present the updated report to the court.

“Whatever it is, some decisions are difficult, we are not saying they aren’t difficult… we extend the time for taking a decision in terms of the Order dated 25th of January, 2024,” the CJI remarked.

Every year, thousands of Hindus and Muslims visit this sacred site, but it has become the center of a heated argument over who has the right to perform religious rituals there. Both communities claim the rights to conduct their respective ceremonies at the shrine.

Background:

The dispute centers around the belief of some groups that the shrine was originally a Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Dattatreya. Currently, the shrine witnesses both Hindu and Muslim rituals. A Hindu priest (Pujari) leads the Hindu ceremonies, while a Muslim priest (Mujawar) oversees the Muslim rituals. However, the situation became tense after the Karnataka High Court ruled in March 2023 that only a Mujawar (Muslim priest) should be allowed to conduct rituals at the site, which led to further confusion and disagreements.

Last year, As per the January 25, 2024, order, the court noted that the Karnataka government had set up a cabinet sub-committee to address the dispute. But even with the sub-committee in place, no resolution was achieved, and the deliberations have continued without progress.

By September 2024, the Supreme Court had already given the Karnataka government a “last opportunity” to make a decision. However, during a hearing on Tuesday, the court was informed that the sub-committee was still working on the matter, leading the court to extend the deadline for a final time.

“It is distressing to note that the Cabinet Sub-Committee has been working on this since before January 2024 but seems to have made no real progress,” the court remarked, highlighting the urgency of the situation. The court expressed its frustration and emphasized that this delay was unacceptable.

The court also warned that if the Karnataka government fails to resolve the issue within the next eight weeks, there will be penalties imposed on the state, although the exact penalties have not been specified. This has raised concerns about the possible consequences for the state if the matter is not settled soon.

The case will now be heard again in March 2025.

Case Details : SYED GHOUSE MOHIYUDDIN SHAKHADRI Versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.|SLP(C) No. 10131/2023

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE

author

Minakshi Bindhani

LL.M( Criminal Law)| BA.LL.B (Hons)

Similar Posts