Jagannath temple body to apply for patents on names
Amid the tussle between Odisha and West Bengal over naming of the Jagannath temple in Digha as Jagannath dham, the Jagannath temple management committee of Puri on Monday said it would apply for patent for expressions such as 'Srimandir', 'Jagannath Dham', and 'Mahaprasad'.
The temple management committee which met in Puri on Monday said the Sri Jagannath Temple Administration would apply for patents of terms such as 'Srimandir', 'Jagannath Dham', 'Mahaprasad', 'logo of Srimandir', 'Shrikshetra', and 'Purushottam Dham'. It has been approved in a high-level meeting today,' said SJTA chief administrator Arabinda Padhee.
'Patenting these temple-related terms is a legal measure aimed at preserving the sanctity, heritage, and unique identity of the Jagannath Temple. This step is crucial to prevent the indiscriminate use of sacred terminology linked to Lord Jagannath,' said Arabinda Padhee, chief administrator of the temple.
Last month, West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee inaugurated the Jagannath Temple in Digha referring to it as 'Jagannath Dham' sparking widespread criticism, as 'Dham' is a sacred designation traditionally linked to Puri, per Hindu scriptures and Adi Shankaracharya's designation of four Dhams (Puri, Badrinath, Dwarka, Rameswaram).
Also Read | Attempts to encroach Puri Jagannath temple land will not be tolerated: Shrine authorities
The Puri Shankaracharya and several others have argued that using 'Dham' for Digha undermines Puri's unique spiritual and cultural significance.
The Digha temple allows non-Hindus and foreigners, unlike Puri's Hindu-only tradition, further fuelling objections.
BJP leaders Sambit Patra and Suvendu Adhikari accused the West Bengal government of using the temple for political leverage ahead of the 2026 assembly polls.
Though Odisha chief minister Mohan Charan Majhi this month wrote to Banerjee requesting the removal of the term 'Jagannath Dham' from the Digha temple's official name, the Bengal CM remains unmoved.
Puri's king Gajapati Maharaja Dibyasingha Deb on Monday urged the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) and the state government to take immediate action against the naming of the newly inaugurated Jagannath temple in Digha of West Bengal as 'Jagannath Dham'.
'The nomenclature used for the Digha temple has deeply hurt the sentiments of devotees. Terms like Nilachal Dham, Shreekhetra, Srimandir, and Jagannath Dham have always been exclusively associated with the sacred temple in Puri,' he said.
Also Read | Suspension of Odisha Jagannath temple servitor escalates TMC-BJP row in Bengal
The inauguration of the temple in Digha has already stirred a controversy after Ramakrishna Dasmohapatra, secretary of the Daitapati Nijog, the group of servitors that is responsible for some rituals during the annual Rath Yatra such as carrying the deities to their respective chariots, claimed that leftover wood not used in Nabakalabera was used for idols of Jagannath temple in Digha.
Nabakalebar is a sacred ritual of Lord Jagannath, in which the old wooden idols of the four deities including Lord Sudarshan are replaced with new ones made of neem wood called Daru.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
12 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Sibal questions Dhankar's ‘inaction' on impeachment notice against Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal on Tuesday (June 10, 2025) questioned why Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar had not taken any action on the notice for moving an impeachment motion against Allahabad High Court Judge Shekhar Kumar Yadav, and alleged the government was trying to save the judge after he made "entirely communal" remarks last year. Speaking on the subject of the Uniform Civil Code, Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of Allahabad High Court on December 8, 2024 reportedly said that Hindus did not expect Muslims to follow their culture but only wanted them not to disrespect the same. Mr. Sibal, who is also a senior advocate, said the whole incident smacks of "discrimination" as on one hand the Rajya Sabha secretary general wrote to Chief Justice of India to not go ahead with an in-house inquiry against Yadav as a petition was pending against him before the Upper House, while did not do so in the case of Justice Yashwant Varma. Mr. Sibal said it was very unfortunate and questions are bound to arise when the person who is sitting on the constitutional post, which is second in the hierarchy, does not fulfil constitutional obligations in six months. "On December 13, 2024, we had given a notice for an impeachment motion to Chairman Rajya Sabha, it had signatures of 55 MPs, six months have gone, but no steps have been taken," Mr. Sibal said at a press conference here. "I want to ask those who are sitting on constitutional posts, their responsibility is to only verify whether signatures are there or not, should that take six months? Another question that arises is whether this government is trying to protect Shekhar Yadav," Mr. Sibal said. On the "instructions" of the VHP, Mr. Yadav had made a speech in High Court premises and then the matter came to the Supreme Court which took action, he said. Justice Yadav said in December: 'I feel no hesitation in saying that this is India and it will run as per the wishes of its majority,' he said. A video of the speech was shared on social media by some of the event's attendees. The judge said that being a Hindu, he respected his religion, but that did not mean he had any 'ill will' towards other religions or faith. 'We do not expect you to take seven rounds [around the] fire while getting married... we don't want you to take a dip in Ganga... but we expect you to not to disrespect the culture, gods and great leaders of the country,' Justice Yadav said. Mr. Sibal added: 'Yadav was questioned in Delhi. A report was also sought from the CJI Allahabad High Court. I heard the chief justice of the Allahabad High Court gave a negative report, and amidst this, on February 13, 2025, the Chairman said that the matter should be looked at in a constitutional way and Parliament can take it forward.' The Rajya Sabha secretariat sent a letter to the CJI asking for no action and it was said the matter will be taken as there is an impeachment motion notice and the Supreme Court must stop its in-house procedure against Mr. Yadav, Mr. Sibal said. "I don't understand on what basis this happened? Should the Chairman write such a letter to the CJI? The in-house procedure is SC's own, it has no connection with the impeachment motion. Till now impeachment motion has not even been admitted, it has been six months and only signatures are being verified," Mr.. Sibal said. So when the impeachment motion has not been admitted, what relation does it have with the Supreme Court in-house inquiry, and even if it had been admitted, still what connection does it has with the inquiry, Mr. Sibal asked. 'Communal' statement "What Justice Yadav said is before everyone there is no doubt about that. He has not disputed it. The Supreme Court had to decide whether he should have said so, as according to us this is a totally communal statement. And also decide whether he should sit on the chair of the judge after making that statement," Mr. Sibal said. "Why did you not write a letter over in-house inquiry against Justice Varma. So does this government want to protect Shekhar Yadav, we think they want to save him," he said. So either no action will be taken or they will reject a few signatures in the impeachment notice and reject the motion so that "we go to the Supreme Court and it takes time which would ensure that Shekhar Yadav retires in 2026", Mr. Sibal said. "So according to me this is unfortunate and it smacks of discrimination. The intention of this government is to save Yadav because what he said was entirely communal," he said. Members of several opposition parties on December 13 had moved the notice in the Upper House for the impeachment of Allahabad High Court Judge Yadav over his controversial remarks at a VHP event. The notice for moving the impeachment motion was signed by 55 opposition MPs, including Mr. Sibal, Jairam Ramesh, Vivek Tankha, Digvijaya Singh, John Brittas, Manoj Kumar Jha and Saket Gokhale. The notice for the motion was moved under the Judges' (Inquiry) Act, 1968, and Article 218 of the Constitution, seeking initiation of proceedings for impeachment of Justice Yadav. The notice mentioned that the speech/lecture delivered by Justice Yadav during an event organised by the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) prima facie showed that he "engaged in hate speech and incitement to communal disharmony in violation of the Constitution of India". The notice also mentioned that the judge prima facie showed that he targeted minorities and displayed bias and prejudice against them. At a VHP function on December 8, Justice Yadav said the main aim of a uniform civil code was to promote social harmony, gender equality and secularism. A day later, videos of the judge speaking on provocative issues, including the law working according to the majority, were circulated widely on social media, prompting strong reactions from several quarters, including opposition leaders.
Mint
32 minutes ago
- Mint
Robert Vadra seeks new date to appear before ED in Gurugram land deal case: Report
Businessman Robert Vadra reportedly sought a new date from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to appear before the financial probe agency in connection with the Gurugram land deal case. Vadra, the husband of Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi, was summoned by the Enforcement Directorate on Tuesday. He, however, has "informed the central agency that he would not appear today and sought a fresh date," sources told news agency ANI. Vadra had earlier appeared before the Enforcement Directorate on April 17 — the third straight day — for questioning in a money laundering case linked to alleged irregularities in a 2008 Haryana land deal case. The Enforcement Directorate's probe involves properties in London and financial transactions during the UPA regime (2004–2014). The central agency alleged Vadra's involvement with Sanjay Bhandari through the London property, financial transactions, and personal associations, supported by email trails and Thampi's role, News 18 reported. Bhandari is allegedly a close aide of Vadra and had fled India in 2016. He is currently living in the United Kingdom. On April 17, after the Enforcement Directorate interrogated him on Thursday in connection with the Gurugram land case, businessman Robert Vadra said that the investigative agency was asking him repeated questions that he had already answered in 2019. "There was no new question; all the questions were repeated from 2019. If tomorrow were not a public holiday, I would have to celebrate my birthday in the ED office. "Tomorrow is Good Friday, and I will celebrate my birthday with my family; otherwise, they will keep calling me," Vadra told the media. Vadra slammed the action as a "political vendetta", accusing the government of misusing investigative agencies to target opposition voices. Vadra questioned the ED's impartiality, alleging selective action against leaders from non-BJP parties while vowing to continue his fight against "injustice". "This is a political vendetta. Agencies are being misused. This is wrong. How will there be trust in agencies when they are after any candidates for the CM position in the country, or when a party is doing well? Which BJP minister or member has been summoned by the ED? Why has none of them been summoned? Is everyone in the BJP good? Do they not have any allegations against them? "There are several allegations," Vadra said. Vadra also claimed that the ED's action against him was fueled when he started raising his voice over atrocities against minorities. "If I were to enter politics, which is what everyone wants, they (the BJP) would either speak of dynasty or misuse ED. This difficulty started when, a few days back, I gave messages through social media regarding atrocities against minorities. This is nothing else. Ever since I said that people wanted me to enter politics, this difficulty has started. But the ED summons has no basis," he said.
News18
40 minutes ago
- News18
Bihar Elections: Alliance On Track, NDA Seat Finalisation Soon; Nitish Kumar To Be CM Face
Last Updated: According to sources, ticket distribution in the Bihar assembly elections within the NDA is likely to follow the same formula as in the Lok Sabha elections The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has decided to contest all seats in the upcoming Bihar elections, with sources saying seat distribution may not have been decided yet but other factors have been considered. 'Which caste will get representation on which seat has already been decided for all the 243 seats," a top source told CNN-News18. The state leaders have held several rounds of meetings to understand the share of seats that the NDA wants to contest. Another two or three rounds of meetings are expected to take place before the focus shifts to the finalisation in Delhi. After that, a detailed meeting with the alliance partners will take place to firm up plans for all the 243 seats. Also, there is no doubt in the mind of the alliance that Nitish Kumar will continue to be the face of the bloc. The decision to continue as chief minister after the elections will be left to Kumar, the sources added. On the kind of commentary that political leaders have been making against Kumar's conduct, BJP sources indicated: 'Any sensitive and sensible politician will never make a remark on somebody's health… One should always refrain from commenting on the health of seniors." Alliance partners Chirag Paswan, Jitan Ram Manjhi, and Upendra Kushwaha will contest in the state. Paswan had expressed his wish to contest the assembly polls, pushing forward his 'Bihari first' stance, and his party gave the go-ahead in a recent meeting. According to sources, ticket distribution in the Bihar assembly elections within the NDA is likely to follow the same formula as in the Lok Sabha elections. In the Lok Sabha elections, BJP contested 17 seats, JD(U) 16, LJP five, while Jitan Ram Manjhi's HAM and Upendra Kushwaha's Rashtriya Lok Morcha contested one seat each. Although BJP contested one more seat than JD(U) in the Lok Sabha polls, in the assembly elections, JD(U) may contest on one or two more seats than BJP. As per sources, JD(U) may contest around 102–103 out of the 243 seats, while BJP may contest on 101–102 seats. The remaining roughly 40 seats will be allotted to Lok Janshakti Party (LJP), Hindustani Awam Morcha (HAM), and Rashtriya Lok Morcha (RLM). The BJP has decided that it will not award a ticket to a candidate whose feedback is negative in the last two surveys that the party has done. Seat sharing and seat allocation will also be done on the basis of ability to win. 'Any alliance partner who has lost the seat more than twice may be exchanged with the other alliance partner," the top sources added. Earlier, it was speculated that Union Home Minister Amit Shah would go to Bihar on June 15 but his visit stands postponed. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to travel to Bihar on June 20 for an engagement in Siwan. The Election Commission has indicated that the Bihar assembly polls will take place in either two or three phases. The full bench of the EC, including chief election commissioner Ganesh Kumar, is expected to travel to Bihar this month. First Published: June 10, 2025, 13:09 IST
