WWW.LIVELAW.
IN
1
ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.4 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition (Civil) No.649/2018
MRINALINI PADHI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for directions)
Date : 08-06-2018 The matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, ASG
Mr. R. Bala Subramanium, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, AOR
Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Shibashish Misra, Adv.
Mr. Swetaketu Mishra, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. The issue of public importance highlighted in this petition
relates to the difficulties faced by the visitors to Shri Jagannath
Temple at Puri, and their harassment or exploitation by the Sevaks
of the temple. It is also pointed out that the environment of the
surroundings is not hygienic as it ought to be. There are
encroachments. It is also mentioned that there are deficiencies in
Signature Not Verified
the management of the Shrine. Rituals are commercialised.
Digitally signed by
SANJAY KUMAR
Date: 2018.06.08
15:09:03 IST
Reason:
2. The issue raised involves enforcement of fundamental right
under Article 25 and Directive Principles under Article 38, 49 and
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
2
51A(f) and (g) of the Constitution of India and other rights.
3. Issue notice returnable on 05.07.2018.
4. Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General
for the Union of India, is present in Court and on our asking, he
has agreed to put in appearance for respondent no.1-Union of India.
5. Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, learned counsel, also agrees to appear
for respondent no.2 and 5. Mr. Swetaketu Mishra, learned counsel,
appears for respondent no.3 and 4. They may file their response
before the next date.
6. Service is complete.
7. There is no doubt that proper management of pilgrimage centres
of great importance is a matter of public interest. These centres
are of undoubted religious, social historical and architectural
importance, representing cultural heritage of our country. Millions
of people visit these centres not only for tourism but also for
seeking inspiration for the righteous values and for their well
being. They also make huge offerings and donations for advancement
of such values.
8. This Court in Shri Jagannath Temple, Puri Management Committee
vs. Chintamani Khuntia – (1997) 8 SCC 422, considered and upheld
validity of section 28B and 28C(9) of Shri Jagannath Temple Act,
1954, which required placing of hundis for receiving offerings of
the devotees visiting the temple.
9. This Court in the course of consideration, inter alia, made
the following observations :
(i) The Shri Jagannath Temple (Administration) Act 1952 was an
attempt to check moral degeneration of attendants/Sevaks and
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
3
to check mismanagement. (Para 7)
(ii) The Attendants/Sevaks of the temple do not have any right
under Article 300A to share the offerings as of right. They are
entitled to remuneration as per rules. (Paras 1, 27, 28, 30,
35, 51)
(iii) Right to manage the temple is secular in nature and does
not affect right of Sevaks. (Para 49)
(iv) The rules can be framed to regulate the payment of
remuneration to the Sevaks out of the collections or otherwise.
(Para 49)
(v) Offerings can be collected in Hundis and will vest in the
Temple fund and will not be individual earning of Sevaks.
(Paras 19, 20, 29, 32 and 50)
10. Having regard to the nature of the issue, we consider it
appropriate to issue the following interim directions :
(i) The District Judge, Puri, may give a report on factual
aspects of
(a) Difficulties faced by the visitors;
(b) Exploitative practices, if any;
(c) Deficiencies in the management, if any;
(d) Suggestions, if any.
The District Judge, Puri, may give an interim report by
June 30, 2018. He may take assistance of the Collector and the
Administrator. The Collector/Administrator may provide
necessary funds, facilities and information, as may be
necessary. He may consider any earlier study/report on the
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
4
subject.
(ii) We also direct the Administrator to review the
arrangement of CCTV camras already installed. Apart from the
installation of more CCTV camras at appropriate locations,
footage thereof should be viewed by an independent committee
at suitable intervals and the report thereof be given to the
District Judge, Puri, once in every month so that the District
Judge may issue any direction in this regard, if necessary.
(iii) The Administrator may also ensure that no direct
collection of the offerings is made by any Sevaks and all the
offerings either in hundi or are deposited and accounted for
and properly utilized. They should not be individual pockets
by the Sevaks/attendants who may be given their due
remuneration as per rules. To ensure this, the help of CCTV
camras and its footage or other steps may be explored.
(iv) We direct the State of Orissa to constitute forthwith a
Committee which may study the management schemes in other
important shrines such as Vaishno Devi, Somnath Temple,
Golden Temple, Amritsar, Tirupati Temple, Dharamsthala
(Karnataka) Temple and suggest such changes as may be
considered necessary. The Committee may also give its interim
report by June 30, 2018.
(v) Since these issues may be common to various other
important shrines in the country, we also direct respondent
no.1 – Union of India to constitute a committee to collect
information with regard to such other shrines so that the
management practices therein can be reviewed for the benefit
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
5
of all visitors, wherever necessary.
(vi) It is of prime importance that all the visitors have
hassle free visits and the offerings made are utilized for
righteous objects and not misappropriated in any manner by the
staff/Sevaks. Of course, the staff/Sevkas ought to be duly
compensated by the legitimate remuneration as may be
determined by the concerned authority. The issue of hygiene
and encroachment also need be considered. Exploitative
practices have to be timely stopped.
11. We appoint Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned Senior Counsel, as
Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. The Amicus Curiae may collate
the above reports and give his suggestions for further
consideration. A set of papers and copies of reports when received
may be furnished to him.
12. List the matter on 05.07.2018 at 2 P.M. for further
consideration.
13. We make it clear that any other issues which may be pending
before any other Court/Tribunal may be gone into in accordance with
law and pendency of this petition will be no bar to such
proceedings.
(SANJAY KUMAR-II) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA)
COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
