A curious situation unfolded in the Supreme Court on Tuesday during the hearing of a plea questioning an earlier order permitting the Uttar Pradesh government to utilise funds for the Shri Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan. The order, which was authored by Justice SC Sharma, was also a part of the present bench on Tuesday.
The case took an interesting turn as Justice BV Nagarathna, sitting alongside Justice Sharma, raised strong questions about the state’s involvement in what she described as a private dispute. Justice Nagarathna, who was heading the bench, questioned why the state decided to “hijack” a litigation between two private parties.
Justice SC Sharma, the author of the order and now a part of the bench examining it, clearly questioned how the applicant was seeking a review of the earlier judgment through an application, adding that the same cannot be permitted.
“The application was filed by a sevak (priest) of the temple, seeking modification of the Supreme Court’s earlier direction. I’m pleaded in the case as the party will question how a temple’s money could be handed over to the state without even making them a party,” the bench said.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the applicant, pointed out that the order regarding Banke Bihari Temple was passed in a case which was filed regarding Giriraj temple.
“How can you, by an order in another petition, direct that a private temple’s earnings be handed over to the government?” Sibal asked.
Justice Nagarathna appeared visibly concerned at the UP government’s interference.
“In what capacity has the state entered into this dispute? If states start interfering in private disputes between parties, it will be a breakdown of the rule of law,” Justice Nagarathna said.
While the state government claimed it was not a private dispute and a newly-issued ordinance now placed the temple funds under a trust’s control, Justice Nagarathna remained firm. “We’re not coming in the way of development. But hijacking private litigation by the state is not permissible,” she said.
Justice Sharma, whose prior judgment was being questioned, told the applicant during the hearing, “By filing this application, you want that judgment to be reviewed.” In response, Sibal said he was only seeking to be impleaded in the matter, not to reopen the judgment.
As Justice Sharma said the applicant should file a review first, Sibal responded by saying, he had to be impleaded first and the court cannot pass an order taking away the property of a private temple without pleading with them.
Justice Nagarathna observed that the only concern was the state government filing an impleadment in a private litigant, adding that it can do development work without being party to litigation.
The bench directed the UP government to place on record the latest ordinance issued on May 26 and asked the Principal Secretary of the concerned department to submit details. The matter will next be heard on July 29.
On May 15, the Supreme Court granted the UP government the go-ahead to implement its Rs 500-crore development plan for the Shri Banke Bihari Temple Corridor in Vrindavan, aimed at improving infrastructure and ensuring a safer pilgrimage experience.
A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and SC Sharma had permitted the state government to utilise temple funds for acquiring approximately five acres of land surrounding the temple.
