The Supreme Court has affirmed the order of the Delhi High Court, made on May 29, which permitted the destruction of a Shiva Temple situated on the floodplains of the Yamuna River. The case was titled “Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti v Delhi Development Authority and Others”.
Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and Augustine George Masih, who were sitting on vacation, stated that the High Court’s decision that was being challenged could not be faulted when the issue was heard today, 14th June.
Justice Kumar also raised doubts about the legal standing of the petitioner-samiti in opposing the demolition.
Justice Kumar observed “How can you have an akhada in floodplains? Isn’t Akhada generally associated with (Lord) Hanuman?,”.
When granting permission for the demolition of the Pracheen Shiva Mandir, an ancient Shiva temple near Taj Enclave in Geeta Colony, the Delhi High Court said that Lord Shiva does not need the Court’s protection. Instead, it is the people who want Lord Shiva’s protection and blessings.
The High Court has further said that the removal of encroachments and unlawful buildings from the Yamuna riverbed and floodplain will provide more satisfaction to Lord Shiva.
As per Justice Dharmesh Sharma, “The half-hearted plea by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Lord Shiva, being the deity of the temple, must be also impleaded in the present matter is a desperate attempt to give an altogether different colour to the entire dispute to sub-serve the vested interest of its members. It goes without saying that Lord Shiva does not need our protection; rather, we, the people, seek his protection and blessings. There could be no iota of doubt that Lord Shiva would be happier if the Yamuna River bed and the flood plains areas are cleared of all encroachments and unauthorised construction,” .
Justice Sharma further noted that the temple’s daily prayers and occasional special activities do not automatically classify the temple as a site of public importance.
Upon careful examination of the matter, the High Court concluded that there was no evidence to indicate that the temple was intended for public use and not a privately operated temple under the petitioner society’s control.
The directive further said that the Delhi Development Authority is allowed to remove the unlawful construction, and the petitioner society and its members must not obstruct or hinder the demolition process.
Following this, the Akhada Samiti took their case to the Supreme Court, which rejected it today, 14 June of 2024.