‘What was the tearing hurry?': SC questions UP govt on Banke Bihari ordinance; may put corridor nod on hold
Supreme Court
on Monday questioned the Uttar Pradesh government's move to take over the management of the Shri Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan, stating that key stakeholders had not been heard before the May 15 order allowing the corridor project was passed.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi questioned the state's decision-making, particularly the urgency with which it enacted the Uttar Pradesh Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025. 'What stopped you from acquiring the entire land and properties from your corpus in public interest? What was the tearing hurry in enacting the ordinance, when the matter was sub-judice? Providing basic amenities and developing the area is the duty of the state.
There are numerous instances where the state's participation has helped in developing the religious places like in Golden Temple in Amritsar,' the bench observed.
The court said it would pass orders on August 5 to put the May 15 direction in abeyance and appoint a retired high court or district judge to oversee daily management of the temple. The proposed committee would also include other stakeholders and focus on managing the temple and surrounding areas.
The bench expressed concern about the state approaching the court without informing key parties. 'Less said the better. How do you justify the directions passed by the court? The state in the most unfortunate way came to the court in the most clandestine manner without informing the court receiver or stakeholders... Get the directions behind their back and set aside the order of the high court. This is the least thing we expect from the state,' the bench said.
At present, the court is not examining the constitutionality of the ordinance. That issue will be taken up by the Allahabad High Court. The top court will instead look into interim arrangements for managing the temple and adjacent developments.
'This is the land of Lord Krishna. He was the first mediator known to the world. Let's find a way out to resolve the dispute pending for years and develop the area in the interest of lakhs of devotees who visit these iconic religious places.
Basic amenities need to be created as nowadays religious tourism is one of the biggest sources of revenue,' the bench added.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, representing the state, said a member of the Goswami community had approached the court but was not supported by others. The bench questioned why all warring factions were not heard and asked whether the court receiver in charge of temple management had been consulted.
The court also questioned the state's use of temple funds for acquiring five acres of land for a holding area. It asked why public funds were not used instead and again raised concern about the urgency of the ordinance when the matter was already under judicial consideration.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the temple's managing committee, said the order had been passed without giving them an opportunity to be heard.
He said since it was a private temple, notice to them was necessary.
The court responded by stating that the term 'private temple' was not applicable in this context, given the scale of public involvement and the number of devotees who visit annually.
The top court asked Nataraj to seek instructions from the state and adjourned the matter to August 5. It clarified that the High Court would examine the legality of the ordinance and that the Supreme Court would adjust its May 15 directions accordingly.
Petitioners, including members of the managing committee, have been asked to submit suggestions on how the temple affairs should be managed during the interim period.
The plea, filed through advocate Tanvi Dubey on behalf of the temple's management committee, challenges the ordinance which hands over control of the temple to a state-administered trust.
On May 15, the Supreme Court had allowed the Uttar Pradesh government's impleadment application and permitted the development of a temple corridor at Vrindavan, using temple funds. That order may now be placed on hold pending further directions.
(With inputs form agencies)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
17 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC orders nationwide clean-up of ₹1.6L-cr regulatory assets
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed electricity regulatory commissions (RCs) across the country to prepare a detailed roadmap for liquidating existing regulatory assets (RAs) within the next three years. The court also instructed the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) to ensure strict compliance with this directive by registering a suo motu petition. The court directed that if any new RA is created, it must be liquidated within three years, with the existing regulatory assets cleared within four years starting from April 1, 2024, as per Rule 23 of the Electricity Rules. (HT Archive) The direction came in response to a petition filed by Delhi's three major power distribution companies -- BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd, BSES Yamuna Power Ltd, and Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd -- challenging the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission's (DERC) approach to electricity tariff determination. The companies argued that DERC's tariff policies over the years led to a massive accumulation of regulatory assets, which as of March 31, 2024, stood at ₹27,200.37 crore across the three discoms, including carrying costs. While examining the issue, the bench of justices PS Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta widened the scope of the case, noted that the problem of increased RA was not a phenomenon limited to Delhi. For instance, Tamil Nadu reported an estimated RA of ₹89,375 crore as of FY 2021–22, while Rajasthan's cumulative RA had crossed ₹47,000 crore by FY 2024–25. In contrast, the electricity regulatory commissions of Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Sikkim, Telangana, and Uttar Pradesh stated that they had never created RAs. The Maharashtra commission confirmed it had not created any regulatory assets since March 2020, in compliance with the National Tariff Policy, 2016, and the Electricity (Amendment) Rules, 2024. The court directed that if any new RA is created, it must be liquidated within three years, with the existing regulatory assets cleared within four years starting from April 1, 2024, as per Rule 23 of the Electricity Rules. Rule 23 prescribes that regulatory assets should not exceed 3% of the Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR). The bench held that each RC must prepare a trajectory and roadmap for the liquidation of its regulatory assets, including provisions to deal with carrying costs. It further ordered a thorough audit to determine why discoms were allowed to accumulate RAs without recovery for extended periods. To monitor and enforce these measures, APTEL was directed to invoke its powers under Section 121 of the Electricity Act and issue orders, instructions, or directions to ensure that the RCs fulfill their duties regarding regulatory assets. APTEL must also register a suo motu petition and continue monitoring until the liquidation timelines conclude. The judgment underlined that while increasing electricity tariffs is a tool to bridge revenue gaps, it may impose a sudden 'tariff shock' on consumers. To avoid this, commissions may opt to recover part of the gap immediately and create a regulatory asset for the remainder—recoverable in subsequent years. However, this should not become a long-term practice. 'The financial health and commercial viability of distribution companies must be ensured by the regulatory commissions,' the bench said. It emphasized that tariffs must be cost-reflective, and that revenue gaps between approved ARR and projected revenue should only arise in exceptional circumstances. Highlighting the consequences of unchecked RA accumulation, the court said, 'Disproportionate increase and long pending regulatory assets depict a regulatory failure. It has serious consequences on all stakeholders, and the ultimate burden is only on the consumer.' The court found that while RCs are meant to be independent authorities having functional autonomy, their decisions give a clear impression of a lack of ability to take 'firm' decisions. 'Instead of taking strong decisions on the basis of the statutory mandate, we see instances where the Regulatory Commissions manage and manoeuvre to arrive at a tariff by creating regulatory assets over and above all permissible limits. This is where the problem lies,' the court observed. The bench reminded the RCs to call for ARR, ensure that tariffs are determined, and that truing up is conducted in a timely manner, by exercising suo motu powers if necessary. 'Ineffective and inefficient functioning of the Regulatory Commissions, coupled with acting under dictation can lead to regulatory failure. The commissions are accountable for their decisions, and they are subject to judicial review,' the bench said.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
India's dignity belittled by hand-pulled rickshaws: SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed deep anguish over the prevailing inhuman practice of hand-pulled rickshaws ferrying visitors in the eco-sensitive and automobile-free Matheran hill station in Maharashtra's Western Ghats and said this belittles India's march towards a developing country and its Constitution which promises social and economic justice. A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria recalled a 45-year-old judgment in the Azad Rickshaw Pullers Association case, in which Supreme Court had come to the rescue of exploited cycle-rickshaw pullers and framed a scheme for ensuring their dignity and livelihood, and said that it is the duty of the Maharashtra govt to frame a scheme within six months to provide e-rickshaws to persons engaged in ferrying tourists on hand-pulled rickshaws. Dictating the judgment in court for the bench, CJI Gavai said, "It is really unfortunate that even after 45 years of the SC judgment on cycle-rickshaw pullers of Punjab, the inhuman practice of one human being ferrying another on hand-pulled rickshaws is prevalent (in Matheran)." "Are we alive to the social and economic justice of every human being as mandated by the Constitution? Unfortunately, the answer is in the negative. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Most Beautiful Women In The World Undo Continuing such inhuman practices even after 75 years of the Constitution would be akin to betraying the promise 'We the People' made to all citizens - social and economic justice," he said. To ensure social and economic justice, the state must frame a scheme for the people who hand-pull rickshaws so that they earn their livelihood with dignity, the bench said and asked the Maharashtra govt to take a leaf out of the e-rickshaw scheme which is working well to empower tribal women around the Sardar Patel statue at Gujarat's Sardar Sarovar dam. The CJI said that the govt could purchase e-rickshaws for Matheran and rent them out only to those who hand-pull rickshaws to rehabilitate them.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
In Supreme Court, EC may share same draft roll it gave to political parties
New Delhi: The Election Commission of India (ECI) is likely to inform the Supreme Court that it had shared the draft electoral rolls of Bihar with various political parties on August 1 and had also circulated lists detailing reasons for the deletion of nearly 6.5 million electors, people familiar with the matter told HT on Wednesday. The Election Commission of India headquarters in New Delhi(File Photo) The top court, which is hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the ECI's ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar, on Wednesday directed the poll body to file to file a reply by August 9 in response to allegations that over 6.5 million names were deleted from the draft rolls. An official aware of the matter, requesting anonymity, said: 'The roll shared with parties on August 1 has detailed classifications of the 65 lakh (6.5 million) deletions. While there is no separate category for those who didn't fill enumeration forms, they have been grouped under 'migrated'. Suspected foreign nationals are also under review and listed under the same head, but they are being separately verified by electoral registration officers (EROs).' The top court's order came on a plea filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a non-profit working on electoral and political reforms, alleging that ECI removed a column titled 'Uncollectable Reason' from the version of the draft roll published on August 1. The petition also sought disclosure of booth-wise deletions and their reasons. The top court asked ECI to inform it when were the draft rolls shared to the parties, which parties received these rolls, as well as to submit the list of deleted names. The official cited above said the draft rolls were handed over to all political parties by district collectors at 11 am on August 1, and published on the ECI's website at 3 pm the same day. Booth-level data, the official added, was shared with political party representatives. In a press note on July 25, the commission had said that 2.2 million electors were found deceased, 700,000 were registered in more than one place, and 3.5 million had either migrated permanently or were untraceable. After top court's direction on Wednesday, ECI issued a press note saying: '…lists of electors found dead, permanently shifted, having duplicate entries, or uncontactable after at least three visits by Booth Level Officers (BLOs) had been shared with all political parties and their BLAs on or before July 20.' It further shared a series of posts with various BLAs saying they have received the draft electoral roll and separately a list of the 6.5 million individuals removed from the roll. ECI also said that between August 1 and August 6 (9 AM), no political party had filed claims or objections related to the draft roll. However, 3,659 individual objections and claims have been submitted directly by electors. The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) rejected EC's 'no objections' received remarks, saying EC is trying to create an impression that everything is fine with the Bihar SIR and there are no complaints coming in. 'Nothing could be farther from the truth', the opposition party said in a post on X, listing several concerns, including the claim that its leaders had submitted complaints which were not being counted because they were not routed through BLAs. It also questioned the assumption that all 15,000 Form 6 applications received were from first-time voters and not from electors who had been deleted from the rolls. 'We have been repeatedly asking the EC to provide us with booth level lists of deletion specifying the ground thereof, but to no avail,' the Left party added.
