Banke Bihar Temple row: Supreme Court sets up 14-member panel to oversee functioning

The August 8 order by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said: “The Committee shall make an endeavor to plan the holistic development of the Temple… for which they may privately negotiate suitable purchase of the requisite land. In case no such negotiation fructifies, the State Government is directed to proceed with acquisition of the required land in accordance with law.”

The court also said “besides the four members in the Committee representing the Goswamis, no other Goswami or sevayat shall be allowed to interfere or impede in any way in the managing of the Temple’s critical functions…”

The order came on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Ordinance and the directions in the SC’s May 15, 2025 order allowing the state to use temple funds to buy 5 acres of land around the shrine for a proposed corridor project intended to decongest the area and improve facilities for visiting devotees.

The SC pointed out that even before the May 15 order, the HC had by order dated November 8, 2023 disallowed the state from utilising the temple funds for land acquisition as part of the proposed redevelopment plan and the judgment was never challenged by the state and had thus attained finality.

Noting that the May 15 order was passed not in any appeal challenging the November 2023 order, but by enlarging the scope of another matter where it was hearing a plea regarding the administration of Sri Giriraj Temple at Govardhan, Mathura, the SC said, given the fact that the HC order had attained finality, “this Court could not have, in exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction, effectively set aside the HC’s judgment without any formal appeal or challenge being placed before it”.

The SC directed that the concerned paragraphs be expunged from the May 15 order.

While directing those who had challenged the constitutional validity of the Ordinance to approach the HC, the bench stayed the “operation of” its “in the interregnum, only to the extent they grant the state powers to constitute a Trust for managing the Temple’s affairs”.

“Consequently, the constitution of the Shree Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust, as defined in Section 3 of the Ordinance and its composition, as contained in Section 5, shall be kept in abeyance till the question of validity of the Ordinance is finally resolved by the High Court.”

It clarified that “this interim direction shall not preclude the state from ratification of the Ordinance in the state Assembly” but added that this will “obviously be subject to outcome of the” HC decision on the Ordinance. It asked the HC to decide the question of constitutional validity of the UP Ordinance “expeditiously and preferably within one year of the fresh writ petitions being filed”.

Explaining why it was setting up the committee, the court said, “We are equally mindful that the sum of our directions shall effectively leave the management of the subject-Temple in limbo yet again, since the ad-hoc arrangement of Temple-management has been wholly ineffective and inefficient in discharging its duties over the years. We are pained to observe that the previous administerial deadlock(s) and in-fighting have only worsened the problems… causing much distress to the pilgrims…”