Banke Bihari Temple Trust Ordinance | Amicus Curiae Questions UP Govt's Competence, Allahabad High Court Seeks State's Reply

The Allahabad High Court on Monday called for a response from the Uttar Pradesh Government after the Court-appointed Amicus Curiae raised serious questions regarding the State's competence to issue the Uttar Pradesh Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025. As per the ordinance, the management of Shri Banke Bihari Ji temple in Vrindavan, Mathura and the responsibility of facilities for the devotees will be handled by the 'Shri Banke Bihari Ji Mandir Nyas'. 11 trustees will be nominated in it, while a maximum of 7 members can be ex-officio. All government and non-government members will be followers of Sanatan Dharma. It may be noted that on July 21, the Amicus submitted before a bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal that the State Government lacks competence to issue the Ordinance, as the Banke Bihari temple is a private temple and its religious practice is being carried out by the heirs of Swami Hari Das Ji. According to him, by issuing the Ordinance, the Government was trying to take control over the temple through 'back doors'. He specifically objected to Section 5 of the Ordinance, which provides for the Appointment, Constitution and Terms of the Board and Trustees. Section 5(1)(ii), he noted, provides for two kinds of trustees, one, nominated and the second, ex-officio. According to him, the nominated trustees are the saints, seers, gurus, scholars, mathadhishs and mahants, etc., from the Vaishnav Tradition as well as followers of Sanatan Dharm. He specifically objected to the inclusion of seven ex-officio trustees who are District Magistrate, Mathura, Senior Superintendent of Police Mathura, Municipal Commissioner Mathura, Chief Executive Officer of the Uttar Pradesh Braj Teerth Vikash Parishad, an officer of Dharmarth Karya Vibhag, Government of Uttar Pradesh, and Chief Executive Officer of Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust. He contended that there is no need for the appointment of ex-officio trustees by the State Government, and that this would amount to a 'back door entry' by the State into the affairs of a private temple managed by the Goswamis. According to him, the Ordinance amounts to 'encroachment' on the rights of the Hindus by the State Government and taking control over the temple which has historically been administered by followers and successors of Swami Hari Das Ji. He further submitted that at the most, the State Government could manage crowd and external administration, but it can not interfere with internal religious functioning. The creation of such a Trust, he argued, “amounts to intruding into the Hindu religion by the State Government”. He also contended that the Constitution does not provide for the State to practice any religion or take control of any temple, and this was a clear effort by the Government to take over the temple at Mathura. He pointed out that though temples in Tamil Nadu are under the control of the State Government, the Constitution forbids such a type of venture, where the State encroaches upon religious property or interferes in religious practice. It was also brought to the Court's notice that a related matter is posted before the Hon'ble Apex Court on July 29, 2025. For context, a Miscellaneous Application filed before the Supreme Court, seeking a recall of its May 15 judgment permitting the UP Govt to use temple funds for the corridor redevelopment, is presently pending. It may be noted that on May 15, the application was allowed ex-parte without hearing the sewayats, who later filed a recall plea. The Amicus also informed the High Court that the sewayats are also proposing to challenge the Ordinance before the Supreme Court. Noting that the matter requires consideration, the single judge directed the State Government to respond to the arguments raised by the Amicus Curiae. The matter will now be taken up as fresh on July 30.Brief background of the matter before the HCThe dispute related to the Banke Bihari Temple traces back to longstanding internal differences between the two sects of sewayats of the revered Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan. With around 360 sewayats, the temple has historically been managed privately by descendants and followers of Swami Haridas Ji. When the matter reached the HC, in March 2025, the Court appointed Advocate Sanjay Goswami as Amicus Curiae to assist in resolving management-related complexities. Meanwhile, the State promulgated 2025 ordinance, proposing to create a statutory trust with several State officials as ex-officio trustees. Matter before the Top CourtThe Allahabad High Court in November 2023 gave a nod to the development of the Corridor, a plan proposed by the Uttar Pradesh Government. The Court, however, restrained the UP Government from using Rs. 262. 50 Crores from the bank account of the Deity for the construction of the corridor.However, on May 15, the Supreme Court modified the High...

Banke Bihari Temple Trust Ordinance | Amicus Curiae Questions UP Govt's Competence, Allahabad High Court Seeks State's Reply

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Banke Bihari Temple Trust Ordinance | Amicus Curiae Questions UP Govt's Competence, Allahabad High Court Seeks State's Reply

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers