DIGYADARSAN RAJENDRA RAMDASSJL VARU versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

DIGYADARSAN RAJENDRA RAMDASSJL VARU versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

Sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, prescribing suspension and temporary administration in case of inquiry or vacancy in the office of Mathadhipathi, are reasonable restrictions; they do not violate the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25 or 26 as they operate only in limited circumstances and do not divest the denomination of its rights except temporarily and for justifiable reasons.

Parties
Petitioner: Digyadarsan Rajendra Ramdassji Varu; Respondent: State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 March 1969
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment of Supreme Court
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Validity of Statutes, Religious Freedoms (arts. 25 & 26), Reasonable Restrictions Under Art. 19(1)(f), Administration of Religious Endowments
Constitutional Law Religious and Charitable Trusts Validity of Statutes Religious Freedoms (arts. 25 & 26) Reasonable Restrictions Under Art. 19(1)(f) Administration of Religious Endowments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Digyadarsan Rajendra Ramdassji Varu

Petitioner

State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment of Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 violate Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25(1), and 26(b) & (d) of the Constitution of India

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966, prescribing suspension and temporary administration in case of inquiry or vacancy in the office of Mathadhipathi, are reasonable restrictions; they do not violate the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25 or 26 as they operate only in limited circumstances and do not divest the denomination of its rights except temporarily and for justifiable reasons.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • The inquiry under section 46 is to be concluded within three months; accounts for padakanukas and expenditures are to be kept as agreed.