2010 — The Endowment Commissioner’s Report

10 March 2010 · Report submitted in connection with Supreme Court proceedings

The report dated 10 March 2010 forms an important stage in the judicial and administrative history of the religious institution at Baba Budan Hills. It followed litigation concerning the practices said to have prevailed before June 1975, and it was submitted to the Supreme Court pursuant to the directions issued during the proceedings.

1. Background: from the 1985 enquiry to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s interim directions required further consideration and a report. They also addressed maintenance of the existing position by reference to the 1989 arrangement. This interim reference must not be confused with judicial approval of every historical conclusion contained in the earlier order.

2. Scope of the 2010 exercise

Later judicial accounts describe an extensive enquiry drawing upon statements from individuals and associations, historical publications and administrative material. One later High Court judgment records consideration of statements from 1,015 persons or associations. This is a description of the enquiry’s breadth, not a count of independent contemporary historical documents.

The matters examined included practices of worship and observance, the institution’s management, and historical descriptions of grants, endowments and related arrangements.

3. Recommendations recorded in later judgments

Later Karnataka High Court judgments describe the Commissioner as recommending, among other matters, that the Management Committee appoint a Hindu Archak for daily pooja. This is presented here strictly as a recommendation made in the 2010 report, not as a court’s independent determination that any particular practice necessarily existed in an earlier century.

Judicial summaries also refer to historical land-grant and Tasdik figures discussed by the Commissioner. Such figures are evidence of what the Commissioner recorded in 2010; they require comparison with the underlying Inam settlement papers, grant records and other original documents before being used as definitive historical land findings.

4. Objections and later proceedings

The 2010 report was contested. Objections were raised by interested parties, including the Sajjada Nasheen. The report subsequently figured in proceedings before the Supreme Court and in the State Government’s decision-making process.

On 3 September 2015, the Supreme Court disposed of connected civil appeals in the context of the State Government’s position that the report and objections would be considered at Cabinet level. This should not be represented as the Supreme Court having independently adopted all of the report’s historical findings or recommendations.

The State’s later decision, including the Government Order of 19 March 2018, and subsequent High Court review belong to separate chronological archive chapters.

5. What remains to be verified

• The complete signed or authenticated 10 March 2010 report, including annexures and exhibits.
• The precise text and supporting evidence for each recommendation attributed to the Commissioner.
• Original historical documents cited in the report, rather than relying solely on their later summaries.
• The objections filed by the various parties and their treatment in subsequent orders.

6. Documentary references

Primary record sought: Endowment Commissioner’s report, 10 March 2010.

Later judicial accounts: Karnataka High Court proceedings reviewing the 2018 Government Order, including W.P. No. 18752/2018 (decision dated 28 September 2021), and subsequent appellate proceedings. These are used as evidence of what later courts recorded about the 2010 report; they are not presented as substitutes for the complete report.