Karnataka HC Halts All Construction Activities At Chamundeshwari Temple, Warns Deputy Commissioner Of Contempt For Defying Earlier Orders

“….Orders passed by constitutional courts are not advisory in nature but are binding mandates that carry with them an obligation of strict compliance by all instrumentalities of the State. The executive cannot arrogate to itself the discretion to disregard or dilute judicial orders on the pretext of administrative exigencies or subsequent financial allocations. Such a stand strikes at the very foundation of the rule of law and the doctrine of separation of powers, and, if permitted, would render the authority of this Court nugatory”, single-judge bench of Justice Sachin Shanker Magadum observed.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by Pramoda Devi Wadiyar, the legal descendant of the Royal Family of Mysore, challenging the validity of the Shree Chamundeshwari Kshetra Development Authority Act, 2024.

The Court had earlier passed an interim directing that neither the movable nor the immovable properties belonging to the Temple will be disposed of, nor the prevailing customs and traditions of the temple shall be modified or interfered with.

The Royal Family descendant maintains that the site of the proposed project remains her private property. The constructions supposedly occurring at the temple site are in pursuance of a project prepared by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India, and executed by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of Karnataka, Additional Advocate General N Devdas had submitted before the court on January 14, 2026. He had also informed the court that the construction of a 'multipurpose area' is contemplated under the project for which work tender has been issued.

On April 7, the court was hearing the interim applications filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent state authorities to stall the construction activities at the temple.

Merely because the Union government has released certain funds for a project at the disputed site to benefit the devotees, it doesn't give the state 'a license' to embark upon 'construction activities of 'such scale and permanence', contrary to the court's directions, Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said on Tuesday.

“…While this Court does not lose sight of the submission on behalf of the State that the object of the project is to utilize the funds for the benefit of devotees and to augment infrastructure around the temple, such intention, however laudable, cannot override or dilute binding judicial directions…”, the court held while condemning the actions of the Deputy Commissioner[Palace Muzrai Institution] in the matter.

It noted that the State had earlier given an undertaking in January that no construction activities of a permanent nature would be done at the temple.

“….The undertaking so given was not merely a statement across the Bar, but a solemn assurance to the Court, binding on the State and its instrumentalities. Again, on 17.02.2026, this Court reiterated the binding nature of the said undertaking and observed in no uncertain terms that “the State has given an undertaking….further cautioning that any activity contrary to the undertaking would invite strict action….”, the court reminded the state.

In the current order, the court has directed the state to halt all construction activities at the temple site immediately. The Deputy Commissioner of Mysore Palace has also been asked to file an affidavit detailing the current stage of construction activities, utilisation of 47 crores released by the Union by the state, etc. While giving the said strict mandates, the Court also warned the Deputy Commissioner of 'aggravated' contempt proceedings if any further violations were to occur.

“….In spite of such clear, unequivocal and binding directions, the material on record discloses that construction activity has continued at the disputed site. Such action is not only in the teeth of the interim orders but also in blatant disregard of the solemn undertaking recorded by this Court. Judicial orders cannot be reduced to empty formalities, nor can undertakings given to the Court be permitted to be breached with impunity….”, the court held in its interim order after seeing the photographs placed on record that show continuing construction which are not 'temporary' in nature.

The court also noted that the affidavit filed by the commissioner indicates the construction of permanent structures underneath the ground. The court added that the repercussions of such violations would be duly considered at the time of the final hearing.

The primary contention of Pramoda Devi, before the High Court, is that the Act was promulgated while a legal dispute between the petitioner and the State Government was still pending before the High Court. Notably, as per the statement of objects and reasons, the legislation was enacted to provide for the constitution of an independent statutory Authority to undertake the work of development and maintenance of Shree Chamundeshwari Kshethra.

The petitioner argued that the promulgation of the Act is in contravention of the Rules of Procedure of the Legislative Assembly. It has been contended that various provisions of the Act infringe upon their Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 13, 25, 26, and 29 of the Constitution.

Case Title: Pramoda Devi Wadiyar v. State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 19807/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order