Time to free temples from clutches of advocates: Allahabad High Court laments prolonged litigation

The Allahabad High Court recently said that advocates and people from district administration should be kept away from the management and control of temples [Devendra Kumar Sharma And Another v. Ruchi Tiwari, Acj (Senior Division)]..Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal stressed that efforts should be made to dispose of suits involving disputes pertaining to temples at the earliest.“People will looe 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 said..The Court was hearing a contempt of court application related to the appointment of a receiver in a temple-related case from Mathura. In the order passed on August 27, Justice Agarwal took note of the larger issue related to the pendency of civil suits pertaining to the temples.A total of 197 civil suits related to the temples are pending before the courts in Mathura, the Court was told.The Bench said the time had come to free the temples from “the clutches of practising advocates of Mathura Court”, emphasising that 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. Such person should also be well versed with the Vedas and Shastras, it added..However, the Court noted that out of the 197 temples, the litigation related to temples situated at Vrindavan, Govardhan, Baldeo, Gokul, Barsana and Maath range from 1923 to 2024.“In these famous temples of Vrindavan, Govardhan and Barasana, practising advocates of Mathura Court have been appointed Receivers. The interest of Receiver lies in keeping the litigation pending. No effort is made to conclude the civil proceedings, as the entire control of temple administration vest in the hands of Receiver. Most of the litigation is in respect of management of temples and appointment of Receivers,” it said.It added that “receivership" in the temple town of Mathura has become the new norm, as most of the famous and ancient temples are in the grip of legal battle due to which the courts have restrained the temple trust, its Shebait and the Committee to manage their affairs..The Court observed 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 has become a symbol of status in the city of Mathura, it remarked.Having examined the provision on appointment of receivers to protect, preserve and manage a property during the pendency of a suit, the Court said the discretion has to be exercised with great care and caution. “It cannot in a routine manner appoint Receiver and continue the management of the temple/trust through such appointments. Every endeavour should be there to get the dispute decided at the earliest without prolonging it and running the entire show through the Receivers.".It added that under the garb of provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, the courts cannot prolong a litigation and run a temple or religious trust through a receiver without making any effort to decide the dispute. Considering the situation in Mathura, the Court requested the district judge to “take personal pain and inform his officers about this order and also make every endeavour to conclude the civil disputes regarding temples and trusts of District-Mathura as expeditiously as possible.”“Prolonging the litigation is only creating further disputes in the temples and leading to indirect involvement of practising advocates and district administration in the temples, which is not in the interest of the people having faith in Hindu religion,” Justice Agarwal remarked..Advocates Ajeet Singh and Kamlesh Kumar represented the applicantAdvocate Chandan Sharma represented the High Court..[Read Judgment]