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

Indian Express

a day ago

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 committee members will include retired District & Sessions Judge Mukesh Mishra, District & Sessions Judge, Mathura, Munsif/Civil Judge, Mathura, District Magistrate/Collector, Mathura, Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura, Municipal Commissioner, Mathura, Vice Chairman, Mathura-Vrindavan Development Authority, a renowned architect to be engaged by the chairperson, a representative from the ASI and two persons each from Raj Bhog and Shayan Bhog — the two groups among Goswamis who are the temple's traditional administrators. The District Magistrate/Collector, Mathura, will also function as the member secretary.
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…'
Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry.
He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More