New Delhi: The servitors of the Banke Bihari temple in Mathura have objected to the Allahabad High Court’s proposal to use the temple’s money for the development of the area.
In a petition filed before the Supreme Court, the Sewayats, who describe themselves as the custodians of the deity for the last five decades, have challenged the High Court’s December 20, 2022 suggestion to utilize the money lying in the bank. A detailed plan was called for. The bank account of Bihar is for “Procurement and Development”.
As per an earlier High Court order dated October 18, 2022, the cost of purchasing land to develop facilities around the temple was to be borne by the Uttar Pradesh government. Both these orders have been given on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed for improving the infrastructure inside and outside the temple.
Opposing the December order, Sewayats said, the HC issued it without allowing their plea to make them parties in the matter and to hear them. The sevayats fear that the court proceedings are an attempt by the state to take over the affairs of temple management in the garb of development and maintenance.
The petition argued that if the HC’s proposal to access temple funds is implemented, the state would exercise absolute powers in temple administration, which would be a “complete violation” of the trust of the sevayats.
The Sevayats complained that the HC’s decision to proceed with the hearing without making them part of the matter would have a “great impact on the administration” of the temple and “worship of the deity”.
On Monday, the plea by advocate Swaroopama Chaturvedi was mentioned before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, which agreed to hear the matter next Monday. Chaturvedi urged the bench to hear the matter as it involves temple funds and its utilisation.
According to the petition, Sewayat – who is the goswami of the town – is the custodian of the deity since 1863 when the temple was constructed by his forefathers. Due to disagreements between the different branches of the Goswamis regarding temple management, a civil suit was filed before a Munsif court in Mathura. This resulted in an order in March 1939 in the form of a plan of management which has been followed till date.
As per the plan, the management of the temple was to consist of seven members – four goswamis elected through voting and three nominated by the goswamis who make it to the committee.
“Therefore, Goswami has been exclusively managing the day-to-day operations of the temple for centuries and since 1939 under an order of the court,” the petition said.
But in 2016 a dispute over the nominated members led to the matter reaching the Allahabad High Court, which in 2019 named a civil judge from Mathura as the receiver. Thereafter, the services approached the High Court to hold elections, but the matter remained inconclusive.
With regard to the present petition on improvement of facilities, the Sevayats have “doubted” the petitioners in the matter and have claimed that they have “personal enmity with the State Government vested in the control of the temple”.
Sewayats filed another complaint against the HC and attacked it for “wrongly” recording submissions on its behalf. The petitioners added on two dates – November 28 and December 20, 2022 – that the High Court in its orders has wrongly stated that the process suggested by the State for carrying out development works will not affect the rights of the servitors.
The sevayats further said that the funds of the temple are used to pay salaries to the people who are employed for the management of the temple and daily affairs. Services have said in their petition that no withdrawal is made from the core fund.
Sevayats said the suggestion to bear the expenditure for the development work from the temple funds is in direct contradiction to the state’s statement that all the expenditure will be borne by the state government. “Therefore, the HC has gravely erred in taking up the question of utilization of the deity’s funds for the development of the area around the temple and without hearing the petitioners.”
The petition states that the civil judge, who was appointed as the temple receiver in 2016, is a party to the proceedings pending before the High Court, but no one has appeared on his behalf. Hence, he argued, the HC proceedings are being conducted without any input by the “most essential stakeholders” and is an attempt by the state to take over the temple’s affairs.
(Edited by Tony Rae)
Read also: ‘Mathura is not Kashi’: BJP’s plan to develop Banke Bihari temple area has angered Hindus