2015 — The Supreme Court Proceedings
3 September 2015 · Civil Appeal Nos. 2685 and 2686 of 2010
The Supreme Court’s order of 3 September 2015 marked a significant procedural stage in the dispute concerning religious practices and administration at the institution associated with Baba Budan Hills. Rather than deciding the historical questions itself, the Court permitted the Karnataka State Government to consider the Endowment Commissioner’s report and the objections raised to it.
1. Background: The enquiry and the 2010 report
In 1985, the Karnataka High Court had ordered an enquiry into the customs and practices prevailing at the institution before June 1975. Enquiry reports followed in 1988, and the Commissioner for Religious and Charitable Endowments issued an order on 25 February 1989. That order was subsequently quashed by the Karnataka High Court on 14 February 2007, with directions for fresh consideration.
Following appeals and Supreme Court interim proceedings in 2008, the Endowment Commissioner submitted a fresh report dated 10 March 2010 to the Supreme Court. The report contained administrative recommendations and assessments of historical and religious-practice materials. Those assessments were the Commissioner’s conclusions, not independent judicial findings about events in earlier centuries.
↓
1988 — Enquiry reports
↓
1989 — Endowment Commissioner’s order
↓
2007 — High Court quashes and remits
↓
2008 — Supreme Court interim directions
↓
2010 — Fresh Commissioner report
↓
3 September 2015 — Supreme Court disposes of proceedings
2. Objections before the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recorded that objections to the 2010 Commissioner’s report had been submitted by the appellant claiming to be the Sajjada Nashin and by other contesting respondents. Accordingly, the report was not before the Court as an uncontested or universally accepted statement of historical fact.
3. The State Government’s proposed course
In view of the sensitive issues involved, the State of Karnataka informed the Supreme Court that the report and the relevant objections would be considered at the State Cabinet level. The Court accepted this procedural course and left the State Government to reach a decision after consideration of the materials and objections.
4. What the Court directed
The Supreme Court disposed of Civil Appeal Nos. 2685 and 2686 of 2010 and the connected contempt petition. The existing interim status quo was to continue until the State Government took its decision. Parties aggrieved by the eventual Government decision remained free to seek such legal remedies as were available to them.
5. What followed
Subsequent State-level consideration led to further committee proceedings, including a High-Level Committee report in 2017, and a Government Order dated 19 March 2018. Those later developments, and the judicial scrutiny they received, belong to separate entries in this archive. They should not be retrospectively attributed to the Supreme Court’s 2015 order.
6. Documentary method and source limitations
This archive distinguishes three levels of evidence: (a) what the Supreme Court ordered in 2015; (b) what the Endowment Commissioner recommended in 2010; and (c) what original historical documents independently establish. None of these should be substituted for another.
Primary judicial reference: Supreme Court of India, Citizens for Justice & Peace & Others v. State of Karnataka & Others, Civil Appeal Nos. 2685 and 2686 of 2010, order dated 3 September 2015, with Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 50/2011. The order was identified in online judicial records in the archive’s prior research. No scanned original is reproduced here.
Related archive records: BD-COURT-1985-01 · BD-END-1988-01 · BD-ADM-1989-01 · BD-COURT-2007-01 · BD-COURT-2008-01 · BD-END-2010-01.