Banke Bihari Temple | 'If State Enters Into Private Dispute, Rule Of Law Will Breakdown' : Supreme Court Questions UP Govt

The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the State of Uttar Pradesh how it could intervene in a private dispute related to the Shri Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan and "hijack" the litigation between private persons.A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma orally remarked that if States start entering into the private disputes of the parties, the litigation would be "hijacked" and it would lead to the breakdown of rule of law.The Court was hearing a Miscellaneous Application (MA) seeking to recall the Supreme Court's May 15 judgment which allowed Uttar Pradesh Government to utilise the temple funds for temple corridor redevelopment project. The judgment was passed in a civil appeal between private parties, in which the State intervened. Later, a temple devotee named Devendra Nath Goswami filed the present MA, seeking a recall of the judgment, contending that he was not heard.At the outset, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for the applicant, said: "This writ petition is that the funds with the temple, 300 crores in an MA filed in the Giriraj matter, without making us a party handed over to the State. Setting aside the order of the high court, which said that the 300 crores shall not be given..."On this, Justice Nagarathna enquired: "Were you a party before this Court?" Sibal answered that he wasn't a party. She then asked: "This amount belongs to whom?"Sibal said that the amount is the offering given to the temple by the devotees. He said: "These are charawas given by the public to the temple and the State is taking..how can the temple file an application? It has to be run through somebody so the sevak has filed the application. What has happened is, just the simple question of law, how can you by an order in another petition direct that the private temple's earnings of Rs. 300 crores should be handed over to the State without making anybody a party."He explained that the Supreme Court allowed an M.A. to be filed in another petition by the State, which pertained to the development of the corridor. He submitted that the State cannot take away the funds. The 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, recently on May 15, the Supreme Court modified the High Court's order and permitted the Uttar Pradesh Government to use funds for acquiring 5 acres of land around the temple for corridor development, on the condition that the acquired land shall be registered in the name of the deity.Justice Sharma questioned whether, through this writ petition, the petitioner is trying to review the decision of this Court. When Sibal answered that he is only asking for a 'modification' of the judgment to make him a party, Justice Sharma said: "You cannot be permitted to review a judgment..even the modification of the judgment amounts to reviewing it."Justice Nagarathna then asked the State of Uttar Pradesh's counsel if it was a party in the proceedings before the High Court. When answered that the State was not infact a party before the High Court, she remarked: "In what capacity did the State enter into the dispute? If States start entering into private disputes between parties, it will be a breakdown of rule of law! You cannot hijack the litigation. We are not coming in the way of State doing any kind of development, but in a private litigation between two parties, the State filing an impleading application and hijacking it is not permissible." The Counsel submitted that an enactment has been implemented in this regard, which says that the entire property and funds of the temple could vest in the trust and not with the Government. He said: "Kindly consider, entire money which we are taking about would vest not with the Government but in the trust by virtue of the enactment. That Act says the State Government also has no right to touch the money."However, Justice Nagarathna continued to question how the State could implead itself as a party in the private dispute. "Our only concern is, in a private litigation between two parties, the State filing an impleading application...We are not on the motive part, the State can still do it without being a party of the litigation. What is stopping you from improvement?Whether you should have been impleaded, you are not there in the High Court. "Sibal continued to submit that despite the enactment, if any, the State of Uttar Pradesh cannot be allowed to take away the private funds. This was countered by the State's counsel stating that the State of Uttar Pradesh has no say after the enactment. On the contrary, Sibal's client is a part of the Trust Board. He said: "This enactment will dilute this direction complete and in entirety. It's an ordinance...This Trust is for the administration of the Banke Bihari Temple. Ordinance ...

Banke Bihari Temple | 'If State Enters Into Private Dispute, Rule Of Law Will Breakdown' : Supreme Court Questions UP Govt

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

How can the State hijack a private litigation? The Court asked.

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Banke Bihari Temple | 'If State Enters Into Private Dispute, Rule Of Law Will Breakdown' : Supreme Court Questions UP Govt

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

How can the State hijack a private litigation? The Court asked.

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers