Temple administration in Uttar Pradesh turning into lucrative legal battles: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday criticised the state of temple administration and long-running appointments of lawyers as court receivers for temple management in Uttar Pradesh, particularly in the district of Mathura [Ishwar Chanda Sharma v. Devendra Kumar Sharma]..A Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma flagged concern that such advocates may have have a vested interest in keeping temple litigation pending for personal gain, since they remain in control of temple affairs until such court cases come to an end. The Court warned that the judiciary, revered as the 'temple of justice', cannot be exploited to serve such vested interests."It appears that the issues of Temple administration, and the appointment of Receivers in the suits pertaining to the Temple administration, have become most difficult conundrum for the Courts and very lucrative court proceedings for the Advocates in the State of Uttar Pradesh, especially in the District Mathura. It may be noted that the Courts, which are considered to be the temples of justice, cannot be permitted to be used or misused for the benefit of a group of people, who would have vested interest in prolonging the litigations. Nobody should be permitted to abuse or misuse the process of law under the guise of prolonged litigations in the Court," the Court said..The Court proceeded to call for a report from Principal District Judge at Mathura on the temples in Mathura that remain caught up in litigation and that details of court receivers appointed during such legal battles.In particular, the Court has sought the following information:List of Temples in the District of Mathura in respect of which the litigations are pending and in which the Receivers appointed by the Courts. Since when such litigations are pending and the status of such proceedings. The names and status of the persons particularly particularly advocates appointed as court commissioners. The remuneration, if any, being paid to the Receivers appointed in such proceedings..The matter will be heard next on December 19..The Court was hearing an appeal against an August 27 Allahabad High Court order, wherein the High Court had flagged concern about the large numbers of pending temple-related litigation in the State. Notably, the High Court opined that advocates and district officials should ideally not be appointed as court receivers (officers appointed to take over temple management to protect the temple while a court case is pending).Instead, courts should make every endeavour to appoint a receiver who is connected with the management of a temple and has some religious leaning towards the deity, the High Court said. “People will loose faith if the temples and religious trusts are not managed and run by persons belonging to religious fraternity but by outsiders. Such actions should be prevented at the very beginning,” the Court explained.The Court lamented that receivership has now become a status symbol in Mathura and added that the time had come to free the temples from “the clutches of practising advocates of Mathura Court." The Court further reasoned that a practising lawyer cannot devote sufficient time for the administration and management of temples, especially of Vrindavan and Govardhan, which needs skill in the temple management along with full devotion and dedication.It added that under the garb of provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, courts cannot prolong temple litigation in this manner or run the temple through a receiver without making any effort to decide the dispute. .Time to free temples from clutches of advocates: Allahabad High Court laments prolonged litigation.Advocate Abhikalp Pratap Singh appeared for the appellant before the Supreme Court. .[Read Order]