"Cleanliness, Infrastructure Of Kalkaji Temple Unsatisfactory": Delhi HC Appoints Local Commissioner To Submit Report On Donations, Facilities For Devotees

Update: 2021-07-26 05:29 GMT
story

The Delhi High Court has appointed a local commissioner for paying surprise visits in Kalkaji Temple in respect of ascertaining conduct of 'puja sewa', collection of offerings being put in donation boxes and also other issues regarding cleanliness, hygiene and facilities for devotees.A single judge bench comprising of Justice Pratibha M Singh also observed that the reports submitted by...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Delhi High Court has appointed a local commissioner for paying surprise visits in Kalkaji Temple in respect of ascertaining conduct of 'puja sewa', collection of offerings being put in donation boxes and also other issues regarding cleanliness, hygiene and facilities for devotees.

A single judge bench comprising of Justice Pratibha M Singh also observed that the reports submitted by local commissioner and Receivers previously appointed in the matter showed "unsatisfactory" cleanliness and hygiene conditions.

"Cleanliness of the temple, as also the provision of civic amenities for devotees is a major concern." The Court observed.
"Devotees who visit the temple are lakhs in numbers during the festive season and at least thousands in number on a daily basis. All ld. Counsels, who are appearing for some of the baridars before this Court today, on a query from the Court, agree that the temple complex needs to be re-developed and cleanliness etc. should be maintained and civic amenities ought to be provided for the devotees, who visit the temple." The Court said.

While appointing the local commissioner, the Court also directed it to file a report two days before the next date of hearing and posted the matter for further consideration on August 3.

Coming to a larger issue, the Court also noted that there was a huge pendency due to multiplicity of various cases emerging out of the aforesaid disputes in relation to the temple before district courts.

The Court also noted that three main issues emerge in respect of Kalkaji Temple: first, renovation of temple premises; second, legal issues regarding puja sewa rights inter se amongst various groups including right of women to conduct puja sewa and third, allocation of revenue from shopkeepers, tehbazari holders and dharmshalas.

"The fact that the matters related to the Kalkaji Mandir are spread across various Courts and various judicial officers appears to also have led to a huge delay in the adjudication of the issues involved that have been raised. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that all the baridars ought to be represented before this court in order to pass effective orders in these matters." The Court observed at the outset.

In view of this, the Court issued direction to the district courts for issuing notice to the counsels appearing in matters concerning the rights of puja sewa of the baridars as also the rights of women to conduct puja sewa, in order for them to remain present before the High Court on the next date of hearing.

"The District Judges of the respective courts shall send the electronic record of the matters relating to Category IV, as listed above, to the Registry of this Court, for them to be tagged along with these two petitions." The Court directed.

Additionally, the Court also directed the district judges of the respective courts where matters regarding shopkeepers, dharmshalas etc are pending, to put up a report indicating the specific courts regarding pendency.

In an earlier development, the Supreme Court had commended the previous order of the High Court appointing court receivers in respect of the donations received at the temple.

"It is a very good order by Justice Pratibha Singh. It is a tough action, necessary to bring order to such places" Justice DY Chandrachud had remarked.

Title: NEETA BHARDWAJ & ORS. v. KAMLESH SHARMA

Click Here To Read Order

Tags:    

Similar News