Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Aug 2: Concerned over the sale and encroachment of temple property in Kashmir, the High Court today directed the Chief Secretary to take steps for putting these properties in safe hands so as to preserve and protect them.
Court directed the Chief Secretary that there should be an administration to administer, manage and regulate properties of the Temples in Kashmir so as to preserve and protect them.
Concerned over the sale, lease and encroachment of temple properties in Kashmir in league with their caretakers, Court observed that the management of the properties should be in the hands of safe persons. It directed the Registry to send the judgment copy to Chief Secretary of the State, for taking appropriate steps in view of the Court observations.
“It is not known how and under whose instructions or for that matter under which authority and competence they, the Mahants/Managers of Temples, venture to enter into such activities, by which they alienate, sell or lease the property(ies) of Temple(s). Do such Mahants/Managers have been authorised and empowered to do such acts and activities. Whether, such persons, namely, Mahants or Managers, have been appointed by any authority. Everything is lacking in it. It is pertinent to mention here that there should have been an Act, Rules and Regulations made there under, to provide for proper control, efficient management and regulations of the property(ies) of the Temples of the J&K State and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto”, read the Court order.
The Court passed these judgments and observations while hearing upholding the order of trial court on a petition titled Parmeshvar Giri versus Suresh Sharma with regard to the affairs of a temple and Trust situated at Abi Guzar, Srinagar.
Challenging the order of trial court whereby Suresh Sharma’s application for not entertaining the compromise before Trial Court has been allowed, the High Court held that the trial has done nothing contrary to law and procedure.
The petitioner Parmeshvar Giri, in writ petition, has contended that in view of joint application as well as compromise deed, Trial Court was required to dispose of the matter in light of compromise arrived at between parties and record satisfaction in terms Code of Civil Procedure and pass decree in accordance therewith.
“Glimpse of impugned order dated 9th October 2013 revealed that counsel for respondent here, in unequivocal terms stated that compromise furnished to the Trial Court was not the one contemplated/agreed to by respondent and stated that the same was not acceptable to respondent”, Justice Rabstan said.
The matter, however, Court added, didn’t not clinch here only. “This Court will not restrict itself within the fours of pleadings brought by parties before this Court because sensitiveness is involved in the matter. Allegations and counter allegations have been levelled against by the parties. Alienation of Temple property is alleged. Alienation by sale, lease etcetera, is vituperated”, judgment read.
Justice Tashi, while dismissing the writ petition, said the Trial Court, after hearing both parties, has rightly said the it is not satisfied that the agreement/compromise is lawful, therefore, application of respondent for not entertaining the compromise, was allowed.
“Learned Trial Court has done nothing contrary to law and procedure. But it would be appropriate to say that learned Trial Court has proceeded in the matter rightly and impugned order, as such, need not be interfered with. Petition on hand is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed”, read the judgment.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel