Supreme Court Reinstates Hathiramji Mutt Mahant Arjun Dass
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has overturned the removal of Arjun Dass as the Mahant (custodian) of the Sri Swamy Hathiramji Mutt, a revered institution based in Tirupati. The court found that the proceedings leading to his removal were marred by numerous violations of natural justice. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and Atul S Chandurkar.
The court ordered a fresh inquiry, to be conducted by an independent retired district judge, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness. Justice Duppala Venkata Ramana, a retired judge from the Madhya Pradesh High Court, has been appointed to lead an administrative committee tasked with overseeing the Mutt’s operations, preserving its records, and safeguarding its properties from unauthorized encroachments.
Background of the Dispute
Arjun Dass was appointed as the Mahant of the Hathiramji Mutt in 2000, having been associated with the institution since 1970. His appointment was recognized by the Akhil Bharatiya Sri Panch Digambar Ani Akhada Panchayat and was made official under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. Disputes with the Endowments Department over administrative control soon followed.
In 2002, Dass sought intervention from the Andhra Pradesh High Court, leading to a 2006 ruling that mandated control of the Mutt’s secular affairs be transferred to him. However, in 2017, new allegations of mismanagement arose, culminating in the Dharmika Parishad levying 16 charges against Dass in 2023. These included accusations of financial irregularities, mismanagement of Mutt properties, and deviation from monastic customs. Consequently, Dass was removed from office, a decision upheld by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in 2025.
Supreme Court’s Findings
Arguing before the Supreme Court, Dass contended that the charge memo and supporting documents, crucial to the inquiry against him, were never provided. He also highlighted the conflict of interest posed by members of the Dharmika Parishad being part of the inquiry committee. The Supreme Court accepted these arguments, identifying fundamental procedural flaws in the disciplinary process.
More Read
The court emphasized that the right to a fair hearing includes access to all documents relied upon in the charges. The bench criticized the method of serving documents by affixation at the Mutt premises, which was not under Dass’s control, as legally untenable.
Furthermore, the court reproached the High Court for failing to nullify the proceedings upon recognizing these procedural defects. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the orders of removal, the government’s confirmation, and the High Court’s judgment. Instead of remanding the case to the Dharmika Parishad, the court, utilizing its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, directed a new inquiry by retired District Judge Boddepalli Rama Rao.
Future Course of Action
The appointed inquiry officer is tasked with ensuring Dass receives all necessary documents and that the inquiry is completed within a year. Meanwhile, the administrative committee led by Justice Duppala Venkata Ramana will manage the Mutt and protect its assets. Dass will continue as Mathadhipati and participate in religious activities pending the inquiry’s outcome.
More Read
In its closing remarks, the court underscored the importance of a transparent and fair process for an institution of such historical and cultural significance. The representation for Dass included Senior Advocate Puneet Jain, while the State was represented by Senior Advocates Sidharth Luthra and DN Goburdhun, among others.
