Archaka Raising Separate Family From Parents In Whose Name Temple Land Is Mutated Can't Be Denied Salary: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court has held that salaries of Archakas to a temple cannot be stopped on the ground that temple land which had been transferred to their fathers during their tenure as Archakas, was now mutated, and being enjoyed by them. The Court said:“It cannot be said that the Archakas are not entitled to the salaries for the services rendered by them. The usufruct of the land which...
The Telangana High Court has held that salaries of Archakas to a temple cannot be stopped on the ground that temple land which had been transferred to their fathers during their tenure as Archakas, was now mutated, and being enjoyed by them. The Court said:
“It cannot be said that the Archakas are not entitled to the salaries for the services rendered by them. The usufruct of the land which is mutated in the names of the fathers of the petitioners is being enjoyed by their fathers and the Archakas, who are majors and are married, are a separate family and are therefore separate from their parents. The mutation of the land in the names of the fathers of the petitioners is only done as they are Hereditary Archakas and have rendered Dhoopa Deepa Naivedyam (a scheme introduced by the Government to reimburse Archakas that worked without pay) to the 4th respondent temple during their tenure as Archakas.”
The order was passed by Justice T. Madhavi Devi in a writ petition filed by 3 Hereditary Archakas to the Sri Venugopala and Seetha Ramchandra Swamy Temple, who challenged the non-payment of their salaries since the year 2021 on the pretext that they were enjoying 57 acres of temple lands.
The petitioners stated that they had been appointed as Archakas to the abovementioned temple on the concurrence of the Commissioner of Endowments, in the year 2013 on the sole ground that their fathers were founding members and hereditary Archakas of the said temple.
It was further submitted that the salaries of the petitioners were stopped on account of a report submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments in 2019.
In the report, it was stated that an extent of 57 acres held by the temple had been allotted to the fathers/hereditary Archakas of the petitioners for their services rendered to the Temple. Occupancy Right Certificates were issued for the said lands, subsequently, the land was mutated on the names hereditary Archakas and was now being enjoyed by the petitioners(sons of the hereditary Archakas).
As such, it was deemed that since the petitioners were already enjoying the temple land, they were not entitled to a salary as well.
The petitioners also brought to the notice of the Court that the temple had demanded that the 57 acres of land be transferred back to its name. They stated that although they were willing to transfer the land back, they could not since the land was not vested in their name, but in the name of their fathers.
The Bench took the same on record and ordered that since the respondents had filed an appeal against the order of occupancy rights certificates issued in favour of the fathers of the petitioners, the salary was to be paid to the petitioners without reference to the occupancy rights certificates issued to the fathers of the respective petitioners.
The writ petition was thus allowed.
Case no.: WP. 21596 of 2023
Counsel for petitioner: M. Vidyagar
Counsel for respondents: GP for endowments.