Authorities must extend corresponding pay benefits to similarly situated temple archaks under prior rulings.

The petitioners are archaks at Sri Renuka Yellamma Devasthana.

They sought regular pay scales on par with State Government employees, including benefits under the Fifth and Sixth Pay Commissions and consequential arrears from their stated appointment date, 25 August 2007.

The Court noted that the same issue had been addressed in W.P. No. 110226 of 2016 and connected matters (14 March 2018), whose order was affirmed in appeal; an implementation order followed on 23 September 2019.

It also referred to a later order in W.P. No. 106164 of 2026 (22 September 2026), which granted relief on the basis of those earlier proceedings.

Whether the petitioners’ claim to pay benefits on par with similarly situated temple employees should be considered in light of the earlier orders concerning the same Devasthana.

Whether the respondents should be directed to take action to extend those benefits to the petitioners.

The Court relied on the order in W.P. No. 110226 of 2016 and connected matters (14 March 2018), as affirmed in W.A. No. 100489 of 2019 and connected matters (11 September 2019), and the implementation order dated 23 September 2019.

That precedent considered the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, the Rules of 2002, and the amendment to Rule 8, and held that the amended rule could not, by itself, justify rejecting consideration of the temple management’s earlier recommendation; the Government was required to reconsider the claim in light of the law and comparable benefits extended to employees of other temples.

The present judgment applied that precedent to similarly situated petitioners.

The Court treated the petitioners’ claim as covered by the prior decisions concerning employees of the same Devasthana and by the implementation order.

It also relied on its recent decision in W.P. No. 106164 of 2026, which had granted relief on the same basis.

Rather than independently determining the petitioners’ precise pay entitlement or arrears, the Court directed the respondents to consider their case under the earlier orders and take appropriate action to extend benefits to those found similarly situated.

The respondents were directed to consider the petitioners’ cases and take appropriate action to extend benefits within six weeks.

The Court stated that variance or non-compliance would be viewed seriously and directed the matter to be listed for compliance on 30 November 2026.