(1) 2[Chief Administrator] shall be the Secretary of the Committee and its Chief Executive Officer and shall, subject to the control of the Committee, have powers to carry out its decision in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
(2) Notwithstanding anything in Sub-section (1) or in Section 5 2[Chief Administrator] shall be responsible for the custody of all records and properties of the Temple, and shall arrange for proper collections of offerings made in the Temple and shall have power :–
(a) to appoint all officers and employees of the Temple;
(b) to lease out for a period 3[not exceeding three years] at a time the lands and buildings of the Temple which are ordinarily leased out;
(c) to call for tenders for works or supplies and accept such tenders when the amount or value thereof 3[does not exceed fifty thousand rupees;]
(d) to order for emergency repairs;
4[(e) to specify, by general or special orders, such conditions and safeguards as he deems fit, subject to which any sevak, office-holder or 2[Employee] shall have the right to be in possession of jewels or other valuable belongings of the Temple;
(f) to decide disputes relating to the collection, distribution or apportionment of offerings, fees and other receipts in cash or in kind received from the members of the public;
(g) to decide disputes relating to the rights, privileges, duties and obligations of sevaks, of rice-holders and servants in respect of sevapuja and Nitis, whether ordinary or special in nature;
(h) to require various sevaks and other persons to do their legitimate duties in time in accordance with the record-of-rights; and
(i) in the absence of any sevak or his substitute or on the failure on the part of any such person to perform his duties, to get the Niti or seva performed, in accordance with the records-of-rights by any other person];
5[(j) to issue instructions or directions, from time to time, for controlling the activities, conduct and management of all institutions including Mukti Mandap and Pandit Sabha functioning within the premises of the temple.]
Provided that the exercise of power under Clauses (a), (b), 4[(c) and (e)] shall be subject to the directions if any of the Committee issued-specially in that behalf.
1. Omitted vide Orissa Act 9 of 1966 (w.e.f. 8th November, 1965).
2. Substituted vide Orissa Act 12 of 2004.
3. Substituted vide Orissa Act 17 of 1968.
4. Substituted vide Orissa Act 19 of 1961.
5. Inserted vide Orissa Act 16 of 2003.
14 1[(3) 2[Chief Administrator] may, subject to such conditions, if any, as the Committee may, by general or special order imposes, afford facilities on payment of fees for special darshan or for any special service, ritual or ceremony, such darshan, service, ritual or ceremony not being inconsistent with the custom and usage of the Temple and he shall have power to determine the portion, if any, of such fees which shall be paid to the sevaks, office holders or Servants of the Temple.]
3[(4) Upon failure on the part of any math to supply any article required in connection with the Seva-Puja of the Temple which under the record-of-rights, it is the duty of such math to supply, 2[Chief Administrator] may procure the article by incurring such reasonable expenditure from the Temple Fund as may be necessary and make an order requiring such math to pay to the Temple the amount so expended.]
4[21-A. Control of Sevaks, etc. :– All sevaks, office-holders and servants attached to the Temple or in receipt of any emoluments or perquisites there from shall, whether such service is hereditary or not, be subjected to the control of 2[Chief Administrator] who may, subject to the provisions of this Act and the regulations, made by the Committee in that behalf, after giving the person concerned a reasonable opportunity of being heard
(a) withhold the receipt of emoluments or requisites;
5[(b) impose a fine of an amount not exceeding 2[two thousand rupees;]
(c) suspend; or]
(d) dismiss;
any of them for breach of trust, incapacity, disobedience of lawful orders, neglect of or willful absence from duty, disorderly behavior or conduct derogatory to the discipline or dignity of the Temple or for any other sufficient cause.
6[21-B. Suspension pending inquiry :– The 2[Chief Administrator] may place any sevak, office holder or employee attached to the Temple under suspension :–
(a) where a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending; or
(b) where a case against 7[an office holder or employee attached to the Temple.] in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial 8[, or] 9[(c) where a Sevak is involved in any criminal offence committed inside the Temple premises or in connection with the affairs of the Temple.]
1. Substituted vide Orissa Act 19 of 1961.
2. Substituted vide Orissa Act 12 of 2004.
3. Inserted vide Orissa Act 17 of 1968.
4. Inserted vide Orissa Act 19 of 1961.
5. Substituted vide Orissa Act 17 of 1968.
6. Inserted vide Orissa Act 12 of 2004.
7. Substituted vide Orissa Act 4 of 2009.
8. Substituted vide Orissa Act 4 of 2009 (w.e.f. 15.03.2010)
9. Inserted vide Orissa Act 4 of 2009.
15 CASE LAWS Emoluments beneficial interest attached to office of Khuntias and Mekaps - Performance of Sevas and right to receive emoluments - Cannot be altered : Chintamani Khuntia and others v. The State of Orissa and Others : 77 (1994) CLT 11 : AIR 1994 Ori. 46.
Sec. 21 - The Administrator of the Jagannath Temple has powers to alter, substitute and provide suitable receptacles for proper collections of Bheta and Pindika offered to the deity in thalis, Parakhas and jharis near Bhitar khata, Bahar Khata and Tatna Singhasan of the temple - Such alterations in no manner affect the performance of rites of sevaks which are purely secular and not religious: Bairagi Mekap and another v. Jagannath Temple Managing Committee : AIR 1972 Ori. 10.
Secs. 21 (2) (e) and (f), 21 (3), 21(4)m 24(2) - Validity - Powers conferred on Administrator - Do not contravene Art. 19 (1) (f).
Held, so long as a judicial Tribunal is given the ultimate power to decide whether any order of the executive authority which affects the right of property of an individual is justifiable or not that statutory provision cannot be held to impose an unreasonable restriction on the right of the property: Bhimsen Gochhakar v. State of Orissa: AIR 1959 Ori. 17.