UDUPI: Will Kurubas renew their demand that the Udupi Sri Krishna Mutt be brought under the muzrai department? In 2010, the BJP government had released the temple from its jurisdiction.
With Kuruba leader Siddaramaiah becoming the chief minister, the community may get vocal about inclusion of the famed mutt under the muzrai department. When the Congress was in the opposition, Siddaramaiah had stressed on taking over of the temple. Though he hasn’t made any official remark after taking the charge, his comeback has brought a sense of apprehension among devotees in the temple town.
In 2005 when he was campaigning for Ahinda, Siddaramaiah had urged the state government to take over the mutt administration by bringing it under the purview of the muzrai department.
When the ‘Kanaka Gopura’ was demolished during the Paryaya tenure of Adamar Mutt in a bid to construct a new one, the demand by the Kurubas and progressive thinkers for taking over of the mutt by the government gained momentum. The demand was countered by the then newly formed Tulu Shivalli Madhwa Brahmana Mahamandala (TSMBM) which protested against takeover idea.
Aravind Acharya, president, TSMBM said there could be protests if the state government tries to take over the mutt. In 2005, the Pejawar Seer Shree Vishvesha Theertha had said he is ”ready to sacrifice his life to ensure the Krishna Mutt remains under the control of the Ashta Mutts”.
On Wednesday, Pejawar Seer said Siddaramaiah would not decide to take over the mutt. He said ”he has confidence in the new CM and that there are several mutts in the state like Sringeri, Adi Chunchanagiri, Sutthoor and many more which cannot be taken over by the government”. He also said that Siddaramaiah would not violate Rajadharma (duty of the rulers).
In 2010, the BJP government, after protracted deliberations, released the temple from the jurisdiction of the muzrai department. The denotification came with certain conditions including the mutt should continue to accord the right of darshan of the deity to common people as before, and the order was subject to the orders that may be passed by courts where suits are pending. Another condition is that the government’s prior permission has to be obtained before modifying or demolishing buildings and monuments of religious and historic importance.
