Ancient temple with public user as of right is a public trust regardless of archaka status.

The appellant filed an inquiry petition (No. 277/94) under Section 18 of the Bombay Public Trust Act (BPT Act), 1950, seeking to register the ancient Sri Yallamma Devi Temple at Jalalpur as a "Public Trust".

Respondents 1–9, acting as hereditary Archaks (priests), contested the petition, asserting the temple was private or personal property.

The Assistant Charity Commissioner (ACC) declared it a public trust but excluded the Archaks from becoming trustees on the grounds that they were "beneficiaries".

On appeal, the Charity Commissioner and the District Court reversed this, declaring it was not a public trust, primarily relying on incidental observations in an earlier litigation (RSA No. 729/1986).

The matter was remanded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for fresh consideration, specifically to determine the public nature of the temple regardless of the previous litigation.

1. Whether finding of the Assistant Charity Commissioner that the Sri Yallamma Devi Temple is a ‘Public Trust’ under the BPT Act is proper.

2. Whether hereditary Archaks (priests) are disqualified from being appointed as trustees under the definition provided in Section 2(18) of the BPT Act.

The court applied Section 2(13) of the BPT Act, which provides an inclusive definition of "public trust," and Section 2(17), which defines a "temple" as a place of public religious worship dedicated to or used as of right by the Hindu community.

It relied on the precedent Bala Shankar Mama Shankar Bhattiji v. Charity Commissioner, Gujarat State, which established that for ancient temples where origin is lost in antiquity, public user as of right and government records showing the deity as the owner create a presumption of a public trust.

The court further applied Section 2(18) of the BPT Act to define a "trustee" as a person in whom trust property vests, including managers, without excluding beneficiaries.

The court found the temple to be a public trust because it is an ancient institution where the public worships without hindrance.

Property records (VPC extracts) primarily showed the deity as the owner, contradicting Respondent 6's claim of private ownership.

The court determined that the incidental findings in RSA No. 729/1986 regarding the trust's nature were not binding as that suit focused only on Archak rights between specific individuals.

Regarding the appointment of trustees, the court disagreed with the ACC’s exclusion of priests; it reasoned that Archaks, as "middlemen between the devotee and the deity," are vital to the temple's management and fall within the definition of "trustee" as managers.

To balance management, the court held that while the devotees' committee form the bulk of the trust, the hereditary priestly families must also have representation.

It held that Sri Yallamma Devi Temple must be registered as a Public Trust and modified the list of trustees to include one representative from each of the two common descendant branches of the hereditary Archaks (Opponents 1/2 and Opponents 5/6) alongside the 33 trustees named in the original petition.