The Supreme Court today dismissed a public interest litigation filed by evangelist Dr KA Paul seeking CBI probe into the Tirupati Laddu controversy as well as declaration of Tirupati city as a separate state/Union Territory.A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan passed the order after hearing Paul, who appeared and argued in person.To state briefly, the controversy arose out of a...
The Supreme Court today dismissed a public interest litigation filed by evangelist Dr KA Paul seeking CBI probe into the Tirupati Laddu controversy as well as declaration of Tirupati city as a separate state/Union Territory.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan passed the order after hearing Paul, who appeared and argued in person.
To state briefly, the controversy arose out of a lab report made public by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, as per which, samples of ghee supplied to Tirupati temple for preparation of laddus during the term of the previous YSRCP government were found to contain foreign fats (including beef fat and fish oil).
Following this, about five petitions were filed seeking reliefs including Court-monitored probe into the allegations and more accountability in Hindu temples managed by government bodies. For details of the same, click here.
On October 4, the Supreme Court constituted an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the allegations about the use of adulterated ghee for the preparation of laddus offered as prasadam at Tirumala Tirupati Temple.
Subsequently, on October 24, Paul mentioned his PIL before a bench of Justices Gavai, PK Mishra and Viswanathan, which agreed to hear him. The petition was filed against the Andhra Pradesh govt, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD), CBI and others.
Today's hearing began with Paul alleging violation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, and as a result, Articles 14 and 21. However, Justice Gavai cut him short, saying "we can't direct a separate State to be created for a particular [temple]".
Paul defended the prayer by contending that if a country can be created for 764 people (Vatican) - "for a bunch of few Catholics" - why can't a state be created for 34 lakh people (population of Tirupati). He urged that he filed the petition to protect the image of Andhra Pradesh (to which he belongs) in the country and to safeguard fundamental human rights.
"They should consider...they made so many territories...29 states...why not a territory for 30 lakh people?", Paul said.
Hearing him, Justice Gavai shot back, "Then we will have to have a separate state for Jagannath Puri, for Kedarnath, for Badrinath, for Madurai temple, for Rameshwaram temple...in Maharashtra, there will have to be 4-5...then Amritsar gurudwara...".
When the bench indicated that it was dismissing the petition, Paul pled that the order forming an SIT to probe into the Tirupati Laddu controversy was passed a month back, without fixing any time limit. As such, the Court may at least fix time limit of 90 days or 6 months, as the investigation has not even started.
However, the bench refrained from passing any direction.
Case Title: DR. K. A. PAUL Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 657/2024