HC Directs Srinagar Dy Commissioner To Take Over Management Of Raghu Nath Ji Temple Land To 'Demarcate Boundaries' Amidst Claims Of Encroachment

“This arrangement shall continue to remain in operation till an appropriate mechanism is put in place to manage and develop the temple properties in compliance of order dated 16.10.2019 passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) or till the Government of Union Territory of J&K comes up with appropriate legislation as suggested by this Court in judgment dated 25.02.2022 passed in PIL No.24/2018 titled Ajay Kumar Sharma v. State of J&K and others, whichever is earlier”, a bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and M.A Chowdhary observed.

These directions came to be passed in a plea assailing an order issued by the Divisional Commissioner of Kashmir on April 23 2021, in terms of which he had directed the expunction of revenue entries for land measuring 159 kanals and 10 marlas, a portion of which was claimed by the petitioners, and the transfer of possession to the temple's management.

The petitioners, including former Bar Association President Mian Qayoom and his siblings, claimed tenancy rights over a portion of the land. They argued that they had been in possession of the land for decades and could not be evicted without due process of law.

Opposing the petitioners' claims, the respondents through Senior AAG Mohsin Qadri contended that revenue records from 1976 and 1987-88 indicate the ownership of the 159-kanal land by the Raghu Nath Ji Temple under the guardianship of Mahant Baba Girdhari Das and the land was primarily used for temple cultivation with portions leased to locals.

The respondents further alleged that subsequent to Mahant Girdhari Das' demise in 1971, and following the demise of his successor Mahant Arjun Das in 1989, the temple faced significant challenges due to the prevailing militancy in the Kashmir Valley. During this tumultuous period, the temple was damaged, and the land was encroached upon by locals, including the petitioners, who exploited their positions within certain groups, he submitted.

Highlighting that while the petitioners and others may have been in possession of the land for decades, this does not automatically grant them ownership the court noted that the entire estate, comprising over 159 kanals, remains vested in the temple.

“The revenue papers placed on record by the petitioners does prima facie indicate that the petitioners and before them their father and grandfather were in possession of the land belonging to the temple and have also been recorded as tenants. What was the nature of the tenancy created and who created this tenancy is not forthcoming from the record”, the bench pointed.

Observing that the Divisional Commissioner's order aimed to protect the temple's property from mismanagement and unauthorized occupation the court also emphasized that any action against the petitioners should follow due process of law, ensuring that they are given an opportunity to be heard.

“The petitioners, who are admittedly under settled possession of the temple property for the last several decades, cannot be termed as rank encroachers and thrown out without following due process of law.If at all, in the opinion of the respondents, the petitioners and other locals are in unauthorized occupation of the temple properties and have managed revenue entries in their favour, nothings stops them from initiating action under law and pass appropriate orders after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to such persons”, the court remarked.

Not making a final ruling on the merits of the petitioners' claims or the respondents' counterclaims and to avoid prejudicing future proceedings the court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar, to take over the management of the temple properties, with a view to safeguarding them from further encroachments and ensuring their proper administration.

The court further ordered that no new mutations be attested in the name of any Mahant or disciple and that the properties remain under the management of the District Administration. The Deputy Commissioner has been tasked with demarcating the temple land, removing encroachments, and putting the properties to beneficial use.

Case Title: Mst Hamida Banoo Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 233

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment