“This position shall continue till the rights of the parties are conclusively determined by a civil court or the Government of Union Territory of J&K comes up with an appropriate legislation for all the charitable and religious institutions and endowments”
Srinagar: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Tuesday directed Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar to manage a Srinagar city based temple and it’s properties after two priests claimed the temple property and it’s affairs.
The Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice M A Choudhary while hearing plea of a priest Prem Jay Mishra stating that he is the Mahant of Shree Bajrang Dev Dharam Dass Ji Mandir, Sathu Barbar Shah, Srinagar and manages the affairs of the temple.
He throw a challenge to the communication of the District Magistrate, Srinagar dated 22 December, 2017, whereby the District Magistrate has, inter alia, withdrawn the order allowing Dr. Jai Ram Dass to perform puja in the temple in question and entrusted the daily affairs of the temple to Baba Dharam Dass Ram Jevan Dass Trust.
The petitioner claimed that the pujari of the temple Mahant Jai Ram Dass has appointed him as Mohatamim of the temple property by virtue of a declaration executed on 01 December, 2015.
“The petitioner, therefore, stakes claim over the right to perform puja and other religious rituals in the temple.”
The bench while hearing out the parties said that indisputably, the temple property in question vests in the Deity and, therefore, none of the parties to this petition or anybody else can stake claim over it.
“There is nothing on record on the basis of which, this Court can come to a conclusion as to how this property came to be dedicated to the temple,” court said.
It was recorded by court that in the absence of any specific record, it has to be presumed that the Maharaja of the time built temples and dedicated landed properties to it so that the income earned out of such properties is used for the management and betterment of the temples and charitable purposes.
It was further noted that ordinarily, the temple properties need to be managed as per the stipulation, if any, contained in the trust deed or dedication made for creating such temple or endowment.
“The office of Mohtmim/Manager is not a hereditary office and, so, the successor of a Mohatmim/Manager of a temple and its properties can’t, as a matter of right, succeed to be the next manager of the properties of the temple,” court said.
Court noted that in the instant case, the last recorded Mohatmim of the temple property is Kankar Dass Chella Pandit Shatrugan Dass Pujari. Thereafter neither any succession is recorded in the revenue record nor is there any person legitimately recorded to succeed Kankar Dass.
“There has been dispute between various sects of Sadhu Samaj, each claiming to succeed to Baba Kankar Dass with the right to manage the properties of the temple,” court mentioned.
It was further said that in the absence of a proper written document governing management of the temple property, the vested interests have staked their claims over the temple properties.
The Bench recorded that it has been brought to the notice of this Court that many such properties of temples, which came in the hands of different vested interests, were either sold/leased out or encumbered to the serious prejudice of the temples and their management.
Court observed that the loot of temples properties became rampant after 1990 when the Kashmir valley came under the onslaught of militancy. The minority community which was frequenting these temples and had interest in their management was made to flee from the valley to save their lives. “So, these temples came to be abandoned.”
“Taking help of this chaotic situation, so called Mahants and Babas in connivance with locals encroached upon the properties of the temples. The Government of the day, which was battling with sudden splurge in militancy, remained oblivious to the situation of the temples and its properties,” court explained.
Court said since most of the temples and their properties were situated in urban areas, as such, due to their high value, the vested interests started litigating with each other, some staking their claims on the basis of recorded entries in the revenue record and others on the basis of trust deeds executed by them inter se without any authority of law.
“The instant property, too, has become victim of the situation and to some extent apathy of the Government,” court observed.
The bench said that “We have carefully gone through the entire record placed before us and are prima face convinced that none of the parties have in their possession any legal document to substantiate their claim either to manage the temple and its properties or to offer puja and prayers in the temple.”
So we direct that, “the management of the temple and its properties in their entirety shall be taken over by the Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar, who shall manage the temple and its properties including making of arrangements for performance of daily puja and other religious rituals through a committee of officers of revenue and other departments, to be constituted by him.”
“The local police shall give all assistance to the district administration and the committee so appointed to carry out its functions.”
“The committee shall open up an account in the name of the Deity/temple and deposit all the usufructs and the profits arising out of the properties of the temple. The committee shall, but, be entitled to use the amount so realized for better management and welfare of the temple,” court directed.
It was also directed that the Deputy Commissioner shall start appropriate steps to make sure that all encroachments over the temple properties are removed by next due process of law.
Meantime court also said that the parties claiming right to do puja and get offerings or to claim management of the properties shall be free to agitate their rights before the civil court.
“No such suit shall be entertained or continued by any civil Court unless the Deputy Commissioner is arrayed as party defendant,” court directed.
Court also directed that in all pending civil suits about temple or temple properties in question, the civil court shall array the Deputy Commissioner as party respondent so as to avoid collusion between the parties.
“This position shall continue till the rights of the parties are conclusively determined by a civil court or the Government of Union Territory of J&K comes up with an appropriate legislation for all the charitable and religious institutions and endowments, as suggested by this Court in its judgment dated 25th February, 2022 passed in PIL No.24/2018 titled Ajay Kumar Sharma v. State of J&K and others, whichever is earlier.”