Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that there was a severe lapse of supervision by the Executive Officer who was expected to supervise the temple. The court added that while displacement of 1 or 2 buffaloes might go unnoticed, in the present case, the sale was of over 200 buffaloes. The court thus suspected negligence on the part of the EO to safeguard the livestock.

“This Court finds that there has been a severe lapse in supervision. While the displacement of one or two buffaloes might go unnoticed, the sale of over 200 buffaloes by the villagers raises serious concerns. Given that an Executive Officer has been specifically appointed to manage the Temple, it was his primary duty to safeguard the livestock and bring them to public auction in a regular manner. Therefore, this Court strongly suspects the negligence of the Executive Officer in allowing these buffaloes to go out of the Temple, enabling third parties to dispose of them in a clandestine manner. Prima facie, the Executive Officer appears to be a key figure accountable for this lapse,” the court said.

The court was hearing a plea by a man against freezing of his bank account and the recovery proceedings initiated by the HR & CE Department. The man was accused of unauthorisedly auctioning buffaloes that were given to the temple by devotees and thereby making unlawful gain.

The petitioner argued that he was not given an opportunity to present his case before the passing of the order. It was argued that while investigating the allegations, the authorities were legally bound to issue notice to the affected parties. However, he argued that in the present case, though the order directly affected his rights and interests, it was issued without issuing any show-cause notice or affording an opportunity of personal hearing.

Although the authorities argued that the order was passed after giving opportunity, the court noted that the order revealed that it did not contain any reference to the issuance or service of any notice to the petitioner.

Thus, noting that the order was passed without issuing notice and without giving an opportunity of hearing, the court held that the same was unsustainable in law and inclined to quash the same. The court added that if the authorities intended to proceed against the petitioner, they should issue proper show cause notice to the petitioner, provide him an opportunity of hearing and pass orders after detailed enquiry.

When the State informed the court that the amount realised from the unauthorised sale of buffaloes was Rs 83,00,000, the court remarked that it was a severe lapse of investigation. The court thus directed the authorities to conduct an enquiry and take appropriate action.