Allahabad High Court defers hearing on UP ordinance forming trust to manage Bankey Bihari temple. Court questions inclusion of bureaucrats, citing Article 25 violations.
Prayagraj: On July 30, the Allahabad High Court has postponed the hearing on the issue of whether the Uttar Pradesh government can create a government-controlled trust to manage and supervise the famous Shri Bankey Bihari Mandir in Mathura.
The court was hearing a case related to the recent ordinance brought by the state — the Uttar Pradesh Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025 — and decided to take up the matter again on August 6.
Also Read: Jama Masjid Shamsi Built Over Neelkanth Temple: Court Scheduled To Hear On Jan 18
Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, who was presiding over the matter, was informed by the state government counsel that the validity of the said Ordinance is currently under challenge before the Supreme Court of India, and the case is pending there.
Because of this, the Allahabad High Court chose to adjourn the proceedings for the time being.
The judge expressed concerns over certain provisions in the Ordinance, particularly regarding the inclusion of government officials (bureaucrats) in the proposed trust that would manage the temple.
The court noted that such a move by the government to gain control over the temple through the ordinance is not acceptable and may go against the fundamental right to religious freedom as protected under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.
In the words of the court,
“it would be proper to get the Ordinance amended as it relates to the inclusion of bureaucrats in the proposed Trust.”
The bench further expressed that
“by way of the Ordinance, the government wants to put control over the temple which cannot be permitted and it is in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution of India.”
Previously, on July 21, the amicus curiae appointed by the court, advocate Sanjay Goswami, raised serious questions about the state government’s authority to pass such an Ordinance in the first place.
He argued,
“The temple in question is a private temple and the religious practice is being carried out by the heirs of late Swami Hari Das Ji,”
suggesting that the temple has been traditionally managed by the Goswami families and not by the state.
Goswami strongly criticised the government’s approach, stating,
“by issuing the Ordinance, the government is trying to take control over the temple through the back door.”
He referred to Section 5 of the Ordinance which deals with the
“Appointment, Constitution and Terms of the Board and Trustees.”
He particularly pointed to Section 5(1)(ii) which outlines the composition of the trust board, mentioning that it will include both nominated trustees and ex-officio trustees.
He explained that as per the Ordinance,
“the nominated trustees are saints, seers, gurus, scholars, mathadhish and mahants from the Vaishnav tradition as well as followers of Sanatan Dharm.”
However, he strongly objected to the inclusion of seven ex-officio trustees — these include the Mathura District Magistrate (DM), Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Municipal Commissioner, Chief Executive Officer of the Uttar Pradesh Braj Teerth Vikas Parishad, an officer from the Religious Affairs Department of UP, and the Chief Executive Officer of the Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust.
According to Goswami, the inclusion of these government officials is nothing more than a way for the government to indirectly take charge of a private temple.
He said,
“There is no need for the appointment of ex-officio trustees by the state government, as this would amount to a back door entry by the government in the private temple managed by the Goswamis.”
Finally, he warned that this ordinance is an attempt to interfere in the religious rights of Hindu devotees. As he put it,
“it is an encroachment on the rights of the Hindus by the state government entering through the back door and taking control of the Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple, as it is a private temple and followers and successors of Swami Hari Das Ji are managing the temple.”
This matter, which touches on sensitive religious and constitutional issues, continues to be closely followed.
With the next hearing scheduled for August 6, the future of the government’s attempt to form a trust to manage this historic temple hangs in balance.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Temple
