Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Saturday, April 27, 2024

Temples Not Getting Dues From UP Government: Allahabad HC

Posted in: Civil Laws
Thu, Mar 21, 24, 16:26, 1 Month ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 12884
Thakur Rangji Maharaj Virajman Mandir vs State Of UP that temples and trusts in Uttar Pradesh were being forced to approach the Court for getting their dues released.

It is most terribly painful and most distressing to learn that none other than the Allahabad High Court which is one of the oldest High Courts in India and it is Uttar Pradesh Bar Council which has maximum number of members all over the world in any Bar Council in any country of the world in a most landmark, learned, laudable, logical and latest judgment titled Thakur Rangji Maharaj Virajman Mandir vs State Of UP And 3 Others in Writ – C No. – 7877 of 2024 that was pronounced as recently as on 18.03.2024 was extremely distressed and pained to note that temples and trusts in Uttar Pradesh were being forced to approach the Court for getting their dues released. We must note here that the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal made the comment while referring the matter to the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh – Mr Yogi Adityanath for necessary action. We must also pay our whole unremitting attention here to the unpalatable truth that the Allahabad High Court also summoned the Secretary of UP’s Board of Revenue for an explanation about the unpaid annuity to at least nine temples in Vrindavan for the past four years.

By all accounts, the Allahabad High Court very rightly called it strange that the temple authorities were running from pillar to post to get their dues released from these government officials. The Bench lamented that:
This Court is pained to note that temples and trusts have to knock the doors of the Court for getting their dues released from the State Government, which should have automatically flowed from the Treasury of the State into the account of temple. We must note that the Bench then also hastened to add that in this modern age of technology, the State should automatically transfer the amount to temples as soon as the financial year begins.

It must definitely be disclosed here that the Allahabad High Court was hearing a petition that had been filed by Thakur Rangji Maharaj Virajman Mandir (petitioner) for payment of the annuity under Section 99 of UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act by District Magistrate of Mathura and its senior Treasury Officer. It must also be revealed here that the petitioner brought to the light of the Allahabad High Court that annuity amounting to Rs 9,125,07 had not been released to nine temples due to lack of permission by the Board of Revenue. However, we must certainly also note here that the government submitted that Rs 2,23,199 had been paid and now a balance of Rs 6,89,308 was remaining.

Adding more to it, the Allahabad High Court also noted that annuity amounting to Rs 3,52.080 in the case of the petitioner had not been paid from 2020 to 2023 and expressed its amazement on the Revenue Board’s statement that money could not be released due to paucity of funds. Of course, the Bench very rightly lamented that:
It is not a question of payment for a single year, but the annuity has not been transferred to the temple in question for the last four years. Most alarmingly, the Allahabad High Court also said that the letter written by the District Magistrate of Mathura to the concerned Special Secretary of UP government in this regard was an indicator to the effect that the official sitting at Lucknow do not care for the release of annuities to the trusts and temples.

What’s more, the Bench lamentably found that no serious effort had been made to release the annuity into the account of the temple or get a budget sanctioned for it from the government. Resultantly, we see that the Allahabad High Court in this leading case then referred the matter to the State Chief Secretary for necessary action by the Chief Minister. The Allahabad High Court will now hear the matter again on March 20, 2024.

At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal of the Allahabad High Court sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
In pursuance to the order dated 11.03.2024, personal affidavit of Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. has been filed today, which is taken on record.

As we see, the Bench then points out in para 2 that:
Dr. Rajeshwar Tripathi, learned Chief Standing Counsel, has invited the attention of the Court to annexure no. 4 of the personal affidavit wherein the details of various amounts released by the Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue towards different temples of the State have been given.

While quite commendably shedding more light pertaining to the amount that had to be paid to the temples, the Bench then discloses in para 3 of this noteworthy judgment that:
In paragraph nos. 5 and 6, brief description has been given as to the partial annuity released to the temples at Mathura. According to paragraph no. 5, the total amount to be paid to temples at Mathura is Rs. 9,12,507/- out of which Rs. 2,23,199/- has been paid and balance amount of Rs. 6,89,308/- remains to be paid to nine temples.

To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 4 of this robust judgment that:
Section 99 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act provides for payment of annuity. Petitioner had earlier approached this Court through Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 56678 of 2007 wherein a direction was given by this Court to release the annuity of the temple. In the instant case the annuity has not been paid from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2023 amounting to Rs. 3,52,080/-.

Most astonishingly, one finds that the Bench then wonders aloud observing succinctly in para 5 of this remarkable judgment that:
The Court is surprised to read the personal affidavit of Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue wherein it has been mentioned that the amount could not be released to the temple in question alongwith eight other temples of Vrindavan due to paucity of fund.

Most lamentably, the Bench minces just no words to wonder aloud noting in para 6 that:
It is not a question of payment for a single year, but the annuity has not been transferred to the temple in question for last four years.

Most significantly, the Bench then propounds aptly in para 7 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment observing that:
This Court is pained to note that temples and trusts have to knock the doors of the Court for getting their dues released from the State Government, which should have automatically flowed from the Treasury of the State into the account of temple. It is an annual feature and the officer concerned should have made the necessary arrangement for releasing the annuity of the temple in question.

It is worth noting that the Bench notes in para 8 of this notable judgment that, In this modern age of technology, once the financial year begins the State should automatically transfer the amount into the account of the temple. Letter written by the District Magistrate, Mathura to the Special Secretary, Government of U.P. at Lucknow is an indicator to the effect that the official sitting at Lucknow do not care for the release of annuities to the trusts and temples.

Most damningly, the Bench concedes in para 9 of this sagacious judgment lamenting that:
From perusal of the personal affidavit of Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue, it transpires that no effort has been made by the officer concerned for last four years for getting the annuity transferred into the account of the temple. Moreover, no correspondence has been brought on record to demonstrate that any serious effort has been made by him to get the budget sanctioned from the State Government. The temple authorities are running from pillar to post for getting their dues released from these government officials, which is strange.

It is worth noting that the Bench then notes in para 10 of this progressive judgment that:
Let Commissioner/Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. remain present in the Court on 20.03.2024 and explain as to why the annuity for the temple in question along with eight other temples of Vrindavan has been withheld for last four years.

What’s more, we see that the Bench then further directs in para 11 of this pragmatic judgment that:
Let this order be handed over to learned Chief Standing Counsel Dr. Rajeshwar Tripathi within 24 hours for necessary compliance. Further, the Registrar (Compliance) shall intimate this order through FAX within 24 hours to the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. who shall place this matter before the Chief Minister for necessary action.

Still more, the Bench then further directs in para 12 of this refreshing judgment that:
Hearing to continue.

Finally, we see that the Bench then concludes by holding and directing in para 13 of this enlightening judgment that:
Put up, as fresh, on 20.03.2024 at 10.00 AM.

All in all, we thus see that the Allahabad High Court while seeking the intervention of the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh – Shri Yogi Adityanath minced just no words to hold in no uncertain terms that it was pained to note that temples and trusts in Uttar Pradesh were being forced to approach the Court for getting their dues released. What one definitely finds most painful to note is that all this is happening when we have a party like BJP having a very strong Hindu vote base ruling in Uttar Pradesh since last seven years! There can definitely be just no denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top