Hereditary priesthood only through paternal lineage: HC

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: In order to claim post of hereditary archak (priest) one has to have the succession on the paternal side, the High Court of Karnataka has ruled.

Dismissing two writ petitions in this regard, the High Court said, “In the light of the fact that the petitioners are claiming the right of archakship by virtue of their maternal grandfather being the archak, it is obvious that they cannot claim that archakship was hereditary. In order to claim the post of hereditary archak, the line of succession should be on the paternal side and not on the maternal side. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed.” Justice NS Sanjay Gowda gave a common judgement in two related petitions filed by MS Ravi Dixit and MS Venkatesh Dixit, both residents of Bengaluru.

They approached the HC against the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Endowment Department and other respondents. Both the petitioners are sons of MN Subramanya Dixit, the archak of Sri Mahabaleshwaraswamy Temple at KR Puram, Bengaluru. Both had submitted representations stating that they were entitled to be appointed as archaks of the temple since the archakship of the temple was hereditary.

Following an earlier petition, the HC had directed the authorities to consider the representation of the brothers according to law. In an order on April 5, 2016, the Department stated that “there was no document indicating that for the previous three generations of the petitioners, their ancestors had been discharging the functions of archakship and therefore, their request to be appointed as archaks could not be acceded to."

The Commissioner also recorded that the father of the petitioners, the late MN Subramanya Dixit was appointed on August 23, 1989 and his father-in-law the late Nanjunda Dixit was the archak before that for 45 years. Therefore, since the archakship was traceable only towards the maternal side of the petitioners, they were not entitled for a claim on hereditary archakship. This order of the Commissioner was challenged by the two brothers before the HC.

The HC in its judgment noted, “It is not in dispute that in order to claim hereditary archakship, it would be necessary that not only father of the petitioners, but also their grandfather and great grandfather should have performed the role of archaks in Sri Mahabaleshwaraswamy Temple and merely because the father of the petitioners had performed the role of archak in the year 1979, the petitioners cannot claim to be hereditary archaks.”

Dismissing the petitions, the HC said, “Since the petitioners admit that it was their maternal grandfather who was performing the pooja, obviously they cannot claim that archakship was hereditary. In fact, in the impugned order also, a finding has been recorded that the father-in-law of the petitioners’ father i.e., Nanjunda Dixit (maternal grandfather of the petitioners) was performing archakship in the temple.”