E-Paper
SC puts Shani temple in Maha govt’s control, stays HC order
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant stayed the December 12 order of the high court
The Supreme Court on Friday put the Maharashtra government in control over the day-to-day administration of the Shingnapur Shree Shanaishwar Devasthan by staying a recent Bombay high court order that had interfered with the government notification appointing an Administrator over the temple.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant stayed the December 12 order of the high court terming it “dangerous” to allow the temple trust to restore control when its term is to end by December 31 this year and with thousands of crores of rupees kept in the temple coffers lying at their disposal.
However, instead of restoring control to the Ahilyanagar district collector appointed as the Administrator by a September 22 state government notification, the top court replaced him with the Divisional Commissioner of Nasik division. The court observed that the collector seems to be under the influence of the trustees who were handed back the possession of the temple and its properties within a day of the HC order giving no “breathing time” for the state to file an appeal.
“It will be dangerous to hand over the charge to you when your term is ending on December 31 and money worth hundreds of crores have to be handled. At least by appointing these bureaucrats, they will be accountable,” said the bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi.
The court faced stiff opposition from the trust represented by advocates Pradnya Talekar and Pulkit Agarwal who questioned the state’s takeover of the temple management by enforcing the Shree Shanaishwar Devasthan Trust (Shingnapur) Act, 2018. Talekar said that the state revenue minister was behind this move and the action is being timed ahead of the local body elections in the state which is already underway. She further stated that the 2018 Act does not provide for an Administrator to be appointed and accused the state of violating the statute by not framing rules for the appointment of a Managing Committee.
The state which had filed the appeal through solicitor general Tushar Mehta denied the allegations and said that the revenue minister had raised concerns over the management of the temple in the state assembly and the Act was brought following concerns of law order and substantial public donations being received by the trust against which there were complaints of alleged malfeasance.
Issuing notice to the trust, the bench held, “The operation of the order of the high court is stayed and all orders passed by the district collector are also stayed.” The order further stated, “We further direct the state to appoint the Divisional Commissioner of Nasik in place of Administrator to see day-to-day administration of the temple. Such an arrangement will continue till the new committee is formed under section 5 of the Act.”
The court became suspect of the collector’s role as it observed, “It is shocking that the decision comes on December 12 and the collector calls the trust members and hands over the charge along with documents. He does not give the state any breathing time. It seems some force is behind him.”
Mehta told the court that the state had informed the collector that it was preparing to file an appeal and even the state has taken note of his conduct. The trust said that the collector acted as per the high court order and may not have risked facing contempt of court.
The court responded, “We do not want to order a probe but it seems the trustees are politically influential and the collector is afraid of you…since you have created so much doubt in our mind about the temple money that we have to now protect it.”
The trust also raised concerns over non-payment of salaries and other benefits to more than 2000 employees working in the institutions managed by the trust. Mehta told the court that the Administrator will examine these issues even as he pointed out that the trust should not be concerned as it was elected under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1961 in January 2021 whose tenure will come to an end this December.
The court allowed the trust to file its response in two weeks and posted the matter in the third week of January for further hearing.
The high court had observed that “without establishing a committee under Section 5 of the Shingnapur Trust Act, 2018, the state could not have proceeded to take action of taking the possession of the properties of the erstwhile trust,” and on this count struck down the September 22 order appointing the Administrator.
Further, the subsequent action of the collector to appoint a chief executive officer for the daily administration of the temple was also set aside as the HC noted that section 36 of the 2018 Act does not empower the Administrator to delegate work to a committee to assist him.
The HC had further directed the collector to handover the entire movable and immovable property of the temple to the erstwhile trust within seven days.
