DOGRA HERALD BUREAU
SRINAGAR, Aug 14
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has directed the Deputy Commissioner of Srinagar to takeover the management of the Raghunath Ji Temple in Barzulla area of Srinagar and its properties which included 160 kanals of land. The Court also directed the Deputy Commissioner of Srinagar to manage the temple and its properties either himself or through a committee of officers of the revenue and other departments directly responsible to him.
The directions were passed by a division bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and M.A Chowdhary on Tuesday on a plea challenging an order passed by the Divisional Commissioner of Kashmir on April 23 2021, wherein he had directed that the entries made in the revenue record of land measuring 159 kanals 10 marlas, which included the land measuring 6 kanal and 10 marlas, as well, be expunged and the possession of the land be handed over to temple management.
The petitioners, including former Bar Association President Mian Qayoom, who was arrested in June during the probe of the 2020 murder of advocate Babar Qadri. Mian Qayoom and his siblings had pleaded to have possession of the portion of the land for several decades.
The petitioners also argued that they are the protected tenants having been inducted by competent persons, who at the relevant time were Mohatamim of the temple and, therefore, cannot, by any stretch, be declared as encroachers and thrown out even without affording an opportunity of being heard to them.
The petition was resisted by the respondents, who contended that as per the revenue record of 1976, 1987-88 Bikrami, the land measuring more than 159 kanals situated at Tengpora of Estate Barzulla is recorded under the ownership of Raghunathji Temple Barzulla through Mahant Baba Girdhari Das Chella Hardev Das Bairagi.
“The subject land is recorded under the personal cultivation of the temple and some part under the tenancy of some locals,” the J&K government argued through its counsels.
The respondents said Mahant Girdhari Das expired in 1971 and his successor Mahant Arjun Das also died in 1989.
They submitted that after 1989 there was militancy in the Kashmir valley and the temple was damaged by the miscreants and the land vested in the deity was encroached upon by the locals, including the petitioners, “taking undue advantage of their key position in the self-styled “tehreek” (armed insurgency).
The respondents argued that the petitioners have taken the benefit of the situation, encroached upon the property of the temple and raised construction without any authority of law.
After hearing the two sides, the bench pointed out that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the entire landed estate measuring more than 159 kanals vests in the temple, which was being managed by Mohatmims appointed from time to time.
“The revenue papers placed on record by the petitioners does prima facie indicate that the petitioners and before them their father and grandfather were in possession of the land belonging to the temple and have also been recorded as tenants. What was the nature of the tenancy created and who created this tenancy is not forthcoming from the record,” the Court order read.
The Court, however, did not make a final ruling on the merits of the petitioners’ claims or the respondents’ counterclaims as that may prejudice the case of the parties before the appropriate forums.
The Court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar to take over the management of the temple and its properties immediately and forthwith and manage the temple and its properties either himself or through a committee of officers of the revenue and other departments directly responsible to him.
“That henceforth there shall be no mutation attested in the name of any Mahant or his disciple and the properties shall remain in the name of temple under the management of District Administration and shall be so reflected in the revenue record,” the order read.
The Deputy Commissioner has been asked to demarcate the entire land belonging to the temple and fix boundaries for its proper identification.
“It shall also take requisite steps for removal of encroachments, if any, in accordance with law,” the court order said.
