Consider Opening Of Temples In Graded Manner: Orissa HC To State On The Issue Of Providing Financial Relief To Sevayat Of Registered Temples [Read Order]

The Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Dr B.R. Sarangi was hearing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners seeking direction to the opposite parties to extend financial relief to the Sevayat/Servitors of registered temples for the period of lock-down.

Arguments Put forth

The Counsel appearing for the petitioners relied on the Supreme Court's order passed on 31.7.2020 in Nishikant Dubey Vs. Union of India & others, Special Leave Appeal (C) No. 8716 of 2020 wherein the State Government was directed to examine the grievance of the petitioners for working out a plan to permit limited 'Darshan' not only in the temple but other religious places and find out the possibility of limited entry of the general public in the temples/religious places in the State, if not from outside the State, at least the persons from within the State, as is being done at some other places.

In the aforesaid case, the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra observed that, in all religious places, entry of a limited number of persons/devotees should have been allowed as is being done throughout India. It said the High Court ought not to have directed that no entry should be permitted in the months of Shravan and Bhado as it for the State Government to take a call on this.

[NOTE: The Supreme Court had disposed of the appeal in the Nishikant Dubey Case (supra) by requesting the State Government to find out a possibility for darshan, which ought to have been done for the general public as is being done in Ujjain, another Jyotirligam. The Court also suggested to the state of Jharkhand to find out a possibility of limited entry of general public in temples, churches and mosques in the State.]

The Counsel appearing for the petitioners also argued that financial assistance of Rs.5,000/- has also been provided to the servitors of Shree Jagannath Temple.

It was thus contended that similar benefit should be granted to the petitioners by providing financial assistance/ration kits.

The Counsel, therefore, submitted that opposite party no.1-the State Government as well as Opposite Party no.3-the Endowment Commissioner should be directed to consider grievances of the petitioners on their representation.

The Addl. Government Advocate submitted that the State Government has never provided any financial assistance to the Sevayats of Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri, however, the Temple Administration has provided financial aid @Rs.5,000/- to the head of each Sevayat family, who are covered under the insurance scheme for the months of May, June, July and August, 2020 in three phases.

It was further submitted that the State Government cannot provide any assistance to the Sevayats, as it would violate Article 27 of the Constitution of India.

Court's Decision

The Court directed the opposite parties-State Government and the Endowment Commissioner to examine the grievance of the petitioners on their representation submitted along with the copy of this order and take a view on their grievance with regard to financial assistance/ration kits, or in the alternative, for the opening of temples, in a graded manner, according to modalities it may decide, as per its assessment, from place to place and time to time, as per earlier orders of this Court, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date of copy of this order is produced before the authority.

With the above observation and direction, the writ petitions stood disposed of.