The Supreme Court has asked the Uttarakhand High Court to hear the plea of a sevayat challenging the appointment of a receiver for Maa Chandi Devi Temple management. The court also directed the DM of Haridwar to submit a report on any alleged mismanagement.
New Delhi: On August 19, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday directed the Uttarakhand High Court to hear and decide the plea filed by a “sevayat” of the Maa Chandi Devi Temple in Haridwar. The plea sought to stay an order that had directed the Badri Kedar Temple Committee to appoint a receiver for overseeing the management of the temple.
A “sevayat” is a priest who is actively involved in performing daily rituals and managing temple affairs.
A bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S V N Bhatti also directed the district magistrate (DM) of Haridwar to submit a report regarding whether there had been any mismanagement in the administration of the temple.
Also Read: Jama Masjid Shamsi Built Over Neelkanth Temple: Court Scheduled To Hear On Jan 18
While disposing of the plea, the top court asked the DM to submit the report in the high court, deferring the matter for six weeks.
The plea was filed by Mahant Bhawani Nandan Giri through advocate Ashwani Dubey, who argued that the high court had arbitrarily delegated the control of the temple to the committee
“without any evidence and complaint.”
The plea further contended that the order was issued despite the presence of a panel, formed in 2012, that included the DM and the senior superintendent of police (SSP) of Haridwar.
According to the plea, the high court’s direction to appoint a receiver was made during the hearing of an anticipatory bail plea in a criminal matter.
The petitioner also highlighted that the Maa Chandi Devi Temple, founded in the 8th century by Jagadguru Sri Adi Shankaracharya, had been traditionally managed by the petitioner’s ancestors as “sevayat.”
The plea claimed,
“neither was there a complaint nor the question of mismanagement or misappropriation ever been flagged by the committee comprising the DM and the SSP.”
It added,
“The high court passed directions which are arbitrary, illegal and perverse and outside the pleadings and without any specific relief, that too in violation of the principle of natural justice as the petitioner, who is the sevayat/chief trustee, was not heard.”
The petitioner also accused the high court of not issuing any notice before passing the directions.
The high court had passed the order while hearing an anticipatory bail plea filed by one Reena Bisht, who claims to be the live-in partner of Rohit Giri, the head priest of the temple. Rohit Giri’s wife, Geetanjali, had lodged an FIR on May 21 against her husband, Bisht, and seven others, alleging that the woman had attempted to run over her son with a vehicle on May 14.
On the same day, Rohit Giri was arrested by Punjab Police in a separate molestation case and is currently in judicial custody.
The high court, in its order, noted,
“Rohit Giri was living with Bisht when his divorce proceedings were pending and Bisht gave birth to their child in January.”
It further observed,
“Trustees of the temple are creating a noxious atmosphere … and there is complete mismanagement in the trust. It cannot be ruled out that there may be misappropriation of donations.”
The Supreme Court’s intervention directs the Uttarakhand High Court to examine all aspects of temple management, the alleged mismanagement, and the legality of appointing a receiver, while considering the petitioner’s long-standing role as sevayat.
Maa Chandi Devi Temple Case | Last Hearing
The Maa Chandi Devi Temple, established in the 8th century by Jagadguru Sri Adi Shankaracharya, has traditionally been managed by the petitioner’s family as sevayat. The plea emphasized that no complaints or issues of mismanagement or misappropriation had ever been raised by the panel of the DM and SSP.
The petitioner stated,
“The high court passed directions which are arbitrary, illegal and perverse and outside the pleadings and without any specific relief, that too in violation of the principle of natural justice as the petitioner, who is the sevayat/chief trustee, was not heard.”
He further asserted that the high court failed to issue a notice before passing the directions and “erroneously” assigned temple management to the Badri Kedar Temple Committee, ignoring the work of the panel.
Also Read: Jama Masjid Shamsi Built Over Neelkanth Temple: Court Scheduled To Hear On Dec 17
The high court issued the order while hearing an anticipatory bail plea filed by Reena Bisht, who claims to be the live-in partner of Rohit Giri, the temple’s head priest.
Rohit Giri’s wife, Geetanjali, had lodged an FIR on May 21 against him, Bisht, and seven others, alleging that Bisht had attempted to run over her son on May 14. On the same day, Rohit Giri was arrested by Punjab Police in a separate molestation case and remains in judicial custody.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Temple
