logo
Banke Bihar Temple row: Supreme Court sets up 14-member panel to oversee functioning

Banke Bihar Temple row: Supreme Court sets up 14-member panel to oversee functioning

The Supreme Court has set up a 14-member high-powered Temple Management Committee under former Allahabad High Court judge Justice Ashok Kumar to 'oversee and supervise the day-to-day functioning inside and outside' the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan till the High Court takes a decision on the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Ordinance bringing the shrine management under a trust.
The August 8 order by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said: 'The Committee shall make an endeavor to plan the holistic development of the Temple… for which they may privately negotiate suitable purchase of the requisite land. In case no such negotiation fructifies, the State Government is directed to proceed with acquisition of the required land in accordance with law.'
The court also said 'besides the four members in the Committee representing the Goswamis, no other Goswami or sevayat shall be allowed to interfere or impede in any way in the managing of the Temple's critical functions…'
The order came on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Ordinance and the directions in the SC's May 15, 2025 order allowing the state to use temple funds to buy 5 acres of land around the shrine for a proposed corridor project intended to decongest the area and improve facilities for visiting devotees.
The SC pointed out that even before the May 15 order, the HC had by order dated November 8, 2023 disallowed the state from utilising the temple funds for land acquisition as part of the proposed redevelopment plan and the judgment was never challenged by the state and had thus attained finality.
Noting that the May 15 order was passed not in any appeal challenging the November 2023 order, but by enlarging the scope of another matter where it was hearing a plea regarding the administration of Sri Giriraj Temple at Govardhan, Mathura, the SC said, given the fact that the HC order had attained finality, 'this Court could not have, in exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction, effectively set aside the HC's judgment without any formal appeal or challenge being placed before it'.
The SC directed that the concerned paragraphs be expunged from the May 15 order.
While directing those who had challenged the constitutional validity of the Ordinance to approach the HC, the bench stayed the 'operation of' its 'in the interregnum, only to the extent they grant the state powers to constitute a Trust for managing the Temple's affairs'.
'Consequently, the constitution of the Shree Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust, as defined in Section 3 of the Ordinance and its composition, as contained in Section 5, shall be kept in abeyance till the question of validity of the Ordinance is finally resolved by the High Court.'
It clarified that 'this interim direction shall not preclude the state from ratification of the Ordinance in the state Assembly' but added that this will 'obviously be subject to outcome of the' HC decision on the Ordinance. It asked the HC to decide the question of constitutional validity of the UP Ordinance 'expeditiously and preferably within one year of the fresh writ petitions being filed'.
Explaining why it was setting up the committee, the court said, 'We are equally mindful that the sum of our directions shall effectively leave the management of the subject-Temple in limbo yet again, since the ad-hoc arrangement of Temple-management has been wholly ineffective and inefficient in discharging its duties over the years. We are pained to observe that the previous administerial deadlock(s) and in-fighting have only worsened the problems… causing much distress to the pilgrims…'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Important cases listed in Supreme Court on Monday
Important cases listed in Supreme Court on Monday

News18

time3 hours ago

  • News18

Important cases listed in Supreme Court on Monday

Agency: Important cases listed in the Supreme Court on Monday, Aug 11: * SC to hear a plea regarding recall of verdict ordering liquidation of Bhushan Power and Steel. *SC to hear plea relating to ex-minister V Senthil Balaji in cash-for-jobs scam cases. * SC to hear plea to examine challenge to the validity of extrajudicial divorce like 'Talaq-e-Hasan' among Muslims. * SC to hear plea by former Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel in a criminal case. * SC to hear pleas by politicians Pappu Yadav and Derek O Brien challenging SIR in Bihar. *SC to hear plea by activist Medha Patkar in a defamation case filed by Delhi L-G VK Saxena in 2000. view comments First Published: August 11, 2025, 08:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

No need for Supreme Court to comment on abilities of high court judges: CJI BR Gavai
No need for Supreme Court to comment on abilities of high court judges: CJI BR Gavai

Time of India

time6 hours ago

  • Time of India

No need for Supreme Court to comment on abilities of high court judges: CJI BR Gavai

NEW DELHI: B R Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, who is next in line to succeed him, have disapproved of the tendency of judges of superior courts to comment on the knowledge and ability of lower court judges, and said the and high courts are only to correct, modify impugned orders/judgments, or set them aside, if they were perverse. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "The high courts are not subordinate to the SC as both are constitutional courts. SC can only rectify, modify or set aside the orders/judgments of HCs. The Constitution gives no authority to comment on the ability, capability or knowledge of individual judges of HCs," the CJI told TOI. Justice Kant agreed. "Superior court judges must discharge their role as friend, philosopher and guide for lower court judges. In the three-tiered justice delivery system, persuasion and guidance yields better results than criticism and castigation," Justice Kant, who'll take over from Gavai on Nov 24, told TOI. Remarks of the CJI as well as Justice Kant assume significance in the wake of an SC bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan criticising an Allahabad HC judge for passing "the worst and most erroneous order" and barring him from hearing criminal cases. The bench Friday expunged its directions for de-rostering the judge while requesting the HC chief justice to look into the matter. SC has no authority to dictate rosters of HCs: Justice Kant Endorsing the vision encapsulated in the saying 'a judge who has not committed a mistake is yet to be born', CJI B R Gavai told TOI that the same principle applies to HC judges, who should refrain from castigating judicial officers on the ground of lack of ability, knowledge or capability while hearing appeals against impugned orders authored by them. "They must administratively convey how to improve and in which area. For that, HC CJs concerned have a significant role to play. The role of superior courts in imparting required training to lower court judges in various aspects of adjudication, acquiring knowledge in myriad fields of law and maintaining proper demeanour and decorum in the courtroom will shape the future of the justice delivery system and reinforce people's faith in judiciary," the CJI said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Kant said HC judges and judicial officers come from various social strata and bring with them a wealth of real-life experiences which can be harnessed, modulated and sharpened with legal training to enrich the justice delivery system to meet day-to-day challenges of open court hearing and address grievances of litigants. "On the judicial side, SC has no authority to dictate to HCs which of their judges would hear what types of cases or the manner in which cases are to be decided. It can only lead by example and guide them with its judgments. Allocation of cases to judges and their roster squarely falls in the exclusive domain of the HC CJ concerned," Justice Kant said. CJI Gavai said, "Every constitutional court judge, be it in HCs or in SC, has the constitutional responsibility to do justice in each case, whether criminal or civil or any other field of law. Superior court judges have the onerous duty to maintain civility while passing orders or writing judgments."

By-elections: YSRCP alleges police bias
By-elections: YSRCP alleges police bias

The Hindu

time6 hours ago

  • The Hindu

By-elections: YSRCP alleges police bias

A YSRCP delegation has submitted a memorandum to the Director General of Police (DGP), seeking urgent measures against 'rampant police misconduct' during the ZPTC by-elections in Pulivendula and Ontimitta in Kadapa district. The team, led by MLCs Lella Appi Reddy and Ramesh Yadav, along with Vijayawada Mayor R. Bhagyalakshmi, former Minister M. Nagarjuna, and former MLA M. Vishnu, alleged that the police had been functioning as proxies for the ruling coalition. The delegation alleged that the officers had been filing false cases, making illegal detentions, and protecting TDP activists accused of attacking YSRCP cadre The leaders said that their attempts to secure an appointment with the DGP failed, forcing them to hand over the memorandum to the staff at the Mangalagiri office. 'Law and order has collapsed. Police in 'yellow shirts' are working to secure TDP victories rather than uphold the Constitution,' charged Mr. Appi Reddy. He claimed that polling centre shifts and voter intimidation were being orchestrated to tilt the polls. Mr. Ramesh Yadav accused the force of shedding its neutrality, saying the police insignia now symbolised allegiance to the TDP, Jana Sena, and BJP. Mr. Nagarjuna alleged that the TDP regime had diluted the constitutional spirit, recalling incidents of violence since the nomination stage. He accused the police of ignoring complaints, mocking victims, and filing counter cases under the SC/ST Act against YSRCP leaders. He held Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu responsible for 'State-sponsored anarchy.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store