Invoking the spirit of Lord Krishna as the “first mediator,” the Supreme Court on Monday urged both parties in the ongoing dispute between the Shri Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan and the Uttar Pradesh government to consider mediation. “Lord Krishna was the first mediator… please try to mediate the matter,” the court remarked.
The case pertains to a proposed redevelopment corridor project estimated at ₹500 crore, intended to be funded through the temple’s resources. The court formed a committee to resolve the dispute between the temple trust and the state government. It also questioned the urgency shown by the Uttar Pradesh government in pushing the project and called for a review of the constitutional validity of the ordinance passed for the redevelopment.
During the hearing, the court raised concerns over the state’s “secretive” approach and the manner in which it had obtained a nod from the court. It said, “We propose to keep part of the earlier judgment in abeyance… we will appoint a former High Court judge or a senior retired district judge as a management trustee. The interim committee (of retired judges) will be allowed to utilize the temple funds to improve infrastructure and ensure a safer pilgrimage experience for devotees.”
The court directed Solicitor General KM Nataraj to consult with the state government and submit a response by 10:30 a.m. tomorrow.
Meanwhile, the temple’s management trustee expressed dissatisfaction with the ordinance, stating that it grants complete control of the temple to the state government while sidelining those who have been serving the temple for decades. “We have not even been heard,” the trustee added.
The Supreme Court further questioned, “If the state wanted to carry out development work, what prevented it from doing so within the legal framework? The issue of land ownership could have been adjudicated.”
In an earlier hearing in May, the court had criticized the state government for allegedly hijacking a private litigation between two parties over temple management. “Was the State a party to the proceedings? In what capacity did the State enter the dispute? If states start intervening in private disputes, it will lead to a total breakdown of law. In private litigation, a state filing an application and hijacking the matter is not permissible,” the court observed.
This was in response to the UP government informing the court that it had formed a trust to manage the temple and oversee the redevelopment work.
Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!
App Store – https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540
Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share