J&K High Court | File Photo
- Says Loot Of Temple Properties Become Rampant After 1990
- ‘So-Called Mahanats, Babas Encroached Upon Them In Connivance With Locals’
Srinagar- Observing that the loot of temple properties became rampant with the onset of turmoil in 1990 and that the so-called Mahants and Babas in connivance with locals encroached upon them, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Tuesday directed Deputy Commissioner Srinagar to take over management and properties of several temples including Shree Bajrang Dev Dharam Dass Ji Mandir, Sathu Barbar Shah here.
Disposing of a petition, a bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and M. A. Chowdhary also directed the Deputy Commissioner to make 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.
“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,” the court said, adding, “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.”
In the absence of any specific record, the court said, 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. Referring to Ailan No.13 dated 3 Asooj Bikrami, the court said it throws some light on how the Mohatmim/Managers of such properties were appointed by the Maharajas.
As per the government, the appointment of Mahant in the Hindu temples in Jammu & Kashmir is governed by the procedure enumerated in Ailan No.13 dated 3 Asooj 1964 Bikrami notified during Maharaja times.
“Ordinarily, the temple properties are required 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, therefore, the successor of a Mohatmim/Manager of a temple and its properties cannot, as a matter of right, succeed to be the next manager of the properties of the temple,” the court noted.
In the instant case, the court said, the last recorded Mohatmim of the temple property was Kankar Dass Chella Pandit Shatrugan Dass Pujari. Thereafter, the court said, 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 right to manage the properties of the temple,” the court noted.
It is 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 court observed.
“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,” the court said, adding, “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, the court said. Consequently, it said, these temples came to be abandoned.
“Taking benefit 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,” the court said, adding, “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.”
Referring to the case in hand, the court said that the instant property, too, has become victim of the situation and “to some extent apathy of the Government.”
“We have carefully gone through the entire record placed before us and are prima facie 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,” the court said.
In the aforesaid backdrop and with a view to ensure that no further damage is caused to the temple properties, the court ordered 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 court also directed the local police to provide 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 court said, adding, “The committee shall, however, be entitled to utilize the amount so realized for better management and welfare of the temple.”
The Deputy Commissioner, the court said, shall also initiate appropriate steps to ensure that all encroachments over the temple properties are removed by following due process of law.
“That the party/parties claiming right to perform puja and receive offerings or to claim management of the properties shall be free to agitate their rights before the civil court,” the division bench said, adding, “No such suit shall be entertained or continued by any civil Court unless the Deputy Commissioner/District Magistrate is arrayed as party defendant.”
The court also directed that in all pending civil suits regarding temple or its properties, the civil court shall array the Deputy Commissioner/District Magistrate 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.”
Meanwhile, the court passed similar order with regard to two other temples in vicinity including Shri Baba Dharam Dass Ram Jevan Dass Trust Sattu Barbar Shah Srinagar; and Shri Baba Dharam Das Ram Jeevan Dass Trust Satu Var Var Shah Bishembar Nagar.
Also, while disposing of another petition, the court directed Deputy Commissioner Baramulla to take over property in the name of a Dharamshalla at Kreeri Baramulla.
“The District Magistrate shall be free to appoint a Committee of officers of revenue and other departments for the said purpose.”
Orders DC To Take Over 159 Kanals Of ‘Temple’ Land In Barzulla
Over 6 Kanals Belong To Ex-Bar President Mian Qayoom, His Siblings
The High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Tuesday directed Deputy Commissioner Srinagar to take over possession of over 159 kanals of land of Raghu Nath Ji Temple in Barzulla here and it includes over six kanals in possession of four siblings including incarcerated Ex-president of Kashmir Bar Association, advocate Mian Qayoom.
The court passed the directions while disposing of several petitions including one filed by Mian siblings.
The petitioners had called in question an order bearing No.18DIVK of 2021 dated 23 April 2021 passed by Divisional Commissioner Kashmir to the extent as it directs that the entries made in the revenue record of land measuring 159 kanals 10 marlas and 192 sq ft in Barzulla here be expunged and the possession of the land be handed over to Raghu Nath Ji Temple, Estate Barzulla, Srinagar Through Mahant Hari Om Das.
Regarding 6 kanals and 10 marlas out of the total land, Mian family, one of the petitioners, had stated that their grandfather namely, Mian Mohammad Sultan was in possession of land measuring 8 kanals at Barzulla Srinagar as tenant. On his death in 1958, the land came in possession of father of the petitioners namely Mian Abdul Rahim. In 1960, a revenue court, on an application of one Baba Girdhari Das, Mahant Mandir Raghu Nath Ji, passed a decree of eviction against their father and others, which was challenged by them before the higher forums including the High Court.
Also, they said, a suit also came to be filed by Mahant Baba Girdhari Das in the Court of City Munsiff, Srinagar for grant of a decree of mandatory injunction for evicting father of the petitioners and others from the land in question.
With a view to amicably settle the dispute, father of the petitioners and others and Mahant Baba Girdhari Das entered into a compromise whereunder out of the 8 kanals of land under possession of the petitioner’s father, he got 4 kanals for cultivation and left the other four kanal in favour of Mahant Baba Girdhari Das. On the basis of the compromise entered, a compromise decree was passed by the City Munsiff, Srinagar on 08 december 1970.
Later on 12.04.1973, they said, Major Arjun Das, who had succeeded Mahant Baba Girdhari Das as Mahant of the temple, entered into an agreement to sell with the father of the petitioners and one Ahad Dar. The petitioner’s father was handed over possession of 2 kanal and 10 marlas more subject to payment of Rs.3400, they said. This is how, they said, their father came in possession of total land measuring 6 kanal and 10 marlas.
“It is not disputed by the official respondents that the petitioners and some others are in possession of different parcels of land belonging to respondent No.7 (Raghu Nath Ji Temple, Estate Barzulla, Srinagar Through Mahant Hari Om Das). How, in what manner and by whom the petitioners (Mian family) and others came to be inducted as tenants is not forthcoming from the record available in the file,” the court said, adding, “There is, however, no dispute with regard to the fact that the entire landed estate measuring more than 159 kanals vests in the temple, which was being managed by Mohatmims appointed from time to time.”
The revenue papers placed on record by the petitioners, the court said, does prima facie indicate that they and before them their father and grandfather were in possession of the land belonging to the temple and have also been recorded as tenants, the court said. “What was the nature of the tenancy created and who created this tenancy is not forthcoming from the record,” the court said.
“Be that as it may, all these issues are such, which are required to be adjudicated upon and determined by a competent revenue court. Needless to say that the Land Revenue Act is a complete Code in itself and provides and delineates detailed procedure for correction of revenue entries and setting aside of mutations etc. Etc,” the court said, adding, “However, no such action, as may be envisaged under the Land Revenue Act or other allied legislations, which is adverse to an individual, can be taken without following due process of law and complying with principles of natural justice.” 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, the court said.
“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 said.
So far as management of the temple properties is concerned, the court said, Divisional Commissioner has, in terms of the impugned order, directed for devising a mechanism to be put in place to manage and develop the temple properties in terms of Ailan No.13 dated Asooj 1964 Bikrami (1907).
“But before such a mechanism can be put in place, the temple properties cannot be allowed to be squandered by so-called Mahants and Babas,” the court said.
It is, thus, high time that the Government steps in and takes charge of the temple properties so that these are saved from further encroachments and appropriate action is initiated to free them from encroachments, if any, taken place on such properties, the court said.
Without returning any finding and rendering any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners and rival contentions of the respondents including officials, the court directed the Deputy Commissioner Srinagar to take over the management of the temple and its properties immediately and forthwith.
“He may manage the temple and its properties either himself or through a committee of officers of the revenue and other departments directly responsible to him,” the court said.
It also directed that that henceforth there shall be no mutation attested in the name of any Mahant or his disciple and the properties shall remain in the name of temple under the management of District Administration and shall be so reflected in the revenue record.
“The Deputy Commissioner or the committee appointed by him as aforesaid, as the case may be, shall demarcate the entire land belonging to the temple and fix boundaries for its proper identification,” the court said, adding, “It shall also take requisite steps for removal of encroachments, if any, in accordance with law.”
Should the Committee be of the opinion that there are certain illegal entries made in the revenue record which are required to be corrected and the persons in illegal occupation of the land are required to be evicted, the court said, procedure laid down in the Land Revenue Act and the allied legislations shall be adhered to in letter and spirit and the affected persons shall be provided adequate opportunity of being heard before passing any such orders.
“The committee shall put the properties of the temple to beneficial use and the usufructs and profits derived out of such properties shall only be used for maintenance of the temple and for other charitable and religious purposes,” the court said, adding, “The committee shall open up a bank account in the name of the temple to be operated through the Deputy Commissioner, so that all monies and profits received from the landed and other property of the temple are accounted for”.
This arrangement, the court said, 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.
Notably, Mian Abdul Qayoom was earlier arrested by the the State Investigation Agency (SIA) in connection with the murder of advocate Babar Qadri in 2020.
Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.