Today(on 14th June),The Supreme Court upheld the Delhi High Court’s decision to permit the demolition of a Shiva Temple on the Yamuna floodplains. Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and Augustine George Masih found no fault with the High Court’s order and questioned the petitioner-samiti’s standing to challenge the demolition.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Today(on 14th June), upheld the Delhi High Court‘s decision dated May 29, permitting the demolition of a Shiva Temple situated on the Yamuna floodplains. The matter was brought before a vacation bench comprising Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and Augustine George Masih. The bench found no fault in the High Court’s order and dismissed the challenge against it.
Justice PV Sanjay Kumar questioned the standing of the petitioner-samiti, who opposed the demolition.
He remarked-
“Why would there be an akhada on floodplains? Isn’t an akhada typically associated with Lord Hanuman?”
The Delhi High Court, while allowing the demolition of the Pracheen Shiva Mandir (Ancient Shiva Temple) near Taj Enclave at Geeta Colony, observed that Lord Shiva does not need the Court’s protection.
“We, the people, seek protection and blessings from Lord Shiva.”
– the court noted.
The High Court further emphasized that Lord Shiva would be happier if the Yamuna riverbed and floodplain were cleared of encroachments and illegal constructions.
The High Court’s ruling was based on the principles of environmental protection and the necessity to preserve the Yamuna floodplains from unauthorized structures. The court underscored the importance of maintaining the natural ecosystem and preventing any form of encroachment that could harm the river’s health and the surrounding environment.
The petitioner-samiti had argued that the temple held significant religious importance and should be preserved. However, the Supreme Court bench affirmed that the legal and environmental considerations outweighed the petitioner’s claims. The justices pointed out that the encroachment on the floodplains posed a threat to the ecological balance and the river’s natural flow.
ALSO READ:“God Shiva Doesn’t Require Our Protection”: Delhi HC Orders Demolition of Illegal Temple
Justice Augustine George Masih, concurring with Justice Kumar, stated that the sanctity of the Yamuna floodplains must be upheld to prevent further environmental degradation.
“Removing unauthorized structures from the floodplains is essential for the health of the river and the surrounding ecosystem.”
-he emphasized.
The Delhi High Court’s order aligns with previous judgments aimed at protecting the Yamuna floodplains. These rulings have consistently highlighted the need to remove illegal encroachments and restore the natural habitat of the river. The court’s decision to allow the demolition of the Shiva Temple reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to environmental conservation and the rule of law.
The Delhi High Court has authorized the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to demolish unauthorised constructions on the Yamuna River flood plains, emphasizing the lack of public dedication of the temple involved.
The case centered around a temple claimed by a petitioner society to be of public significance due to daily prayers and special events during festive occasions. However, Justice Dharmesh Sharma of the Delhi High Court pointed out a notable absence of documentation to support the claim that the temple was dedicated to public use, instead indicating it as privately managed.
Justice Sharma’s observations were particularly striking regarding the misuse of religious figures in legal pleas.
“The counsel’s half-hearted plea that Lord Shiva, as the deity of the temple, should be included in this matter is a desperate attempt to distort the dispute to serve the vested interests of its members. It’s clear that Lord Shiva does not require our protection; instead, we seek his blessings and protection. There’s no doubt that Lord Shiva would prefer the Yamuna River bed and floodplain areas to be free from encroachments and unauthorized construction.”
– stated Justice Sharma.
Further diminishing the petitioner’s argument, the court declared Justice Sharma had further observed that the mere fact that prayers are offered at the temple every day and there are special events on certain festive occasions, would not convert the temple in question to a place of public significance.
Following the High Court’s decision, the petitioner society was instructed not to obstruct the demolition process.
ALSO READ: “Naga Sadhus Are Detached From World, Cannot Seek Property Rights in Their Name”: Delhi HC
“It also directed the Delhi Development Authority to proceed with the demolition of unauthorized construction, while instructing the petitioner society and its members not to obstruct or hinder the process.”
– the court added.
Disappointed by the High Court’s ruling, the Akhada Samiti escalated the matter to the Supreme Court, which dismissed their plea, upholding the lower court’s decision.
CASE TITLE:
Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti v Delhi Development Authority and Others.
