Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court has constituted a High Powered Committee led by Justice Ashok Kumar, former Allahabad High Court Judge, to oversee and supervise the day-to-day functioning of the Bankey Bihari Ji Maharaj Temple at Vrindavan, Mathura in Uttar Pradesh.

The Court constituted this Committee while suspending the operation of the Committee constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025. The Court relegated the challenge to the Constitutional validity of the Ordinance to the Allahabad High Court. Till the High Court decides the matter, the High-Powered Committee constituted by the Supreme Court will be in charge of the temple.

The Court stayed operation of the Ordinance's provisions in the interregnum, only to the extent they grant the State powers to constitute a Trust for managing the Temple's affairs. This interim order was passed considering the fact that the High Court may take some time in deciding the matter.

The other members of the High-Powered Committee are :

The Court ordered that the Chairperson of the Committee shall be paid Rs. 2 lakhs per month as honorarium, which shall be borne from the accounts of the Temple fund. He shall also be provided all the requisite secretarial assistance, including but not limited to transportation facilities.

Shri Mukesh Mishra, Member of the Committee, shall be paid Rs. 1 lakh per month as honorarium, which shall be borne from the accounts of the Temple fund.

The Court further directed that the Committee shall make an endeavor to plan the holistic development of the Temple and its vicinity, 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 clarified that besides the 4 Members in the Committee representing the Goswamis, no other Goswami or sevayat shall be associated or allowed to interfere or impede in any way in the managing of the Temple's critical functions, except in the practice of conducting puja/sewa and offering prasad to the deity.

A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order in a batch of writ petitions challenging the Ordinance.

The bench noted that 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 plaguing the Temple, causing much distress to the pilgrims – who are left without any amenities or redress.

The material on record indicates that despite the substantial donations received by the Temple running into hundreds of crores, no tangible steps appear to have been taken by the successive managements for providing essential facilities to the scores of devotees visiting the Temple. We are also informed that the Goswami Shebaits remain divided into factions and continue to litigate before the civil courts, further contributing to administrative inaction," the Court cited the reasons for appointing the Committee. The State Government also did not object to the Court's constitution of a Committee.

The Court stated that the Committee may deal with a variety of issues incidental to the proper functioning of the Temple, which include, but are not limited to, the provision of essential amenities such as clean drinking water, functional washrooms, adequate shelter and seating, dedicated corridors for crowd movement, and special arrangements for the elderly, women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The Court also requested the Allahabad High Court to decide the constitutonal validity of the Ordinance within a period of one year from the filing of the writ petitions.

Furthermore, the Court also withdrew the directions in its judgment delivered on May 15, 2025 by another bench in a civil appeal which allowed the State to utilize the temple funds for the Vrindavan corridor development project.

Appearance: Senior Advocates Shyam Divan, Kapil Sibal, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Amit Anand Tiwari, Advocate Tanvi Dubey (for petitioners); ASG KM Nataraj and AoR Ruchira Goel (for UP); Sr Advs Navin Pahwa and Vibha Datta Makhija (for respondents)

Case Title:

(1) DEVENDRA NATH GOSWAMI Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 709/2025

(2) MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF THAKUR SHREE BANKEY BIHARI JI MAHARAJ TEMPLE AND ANR. Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 704/2025 (and connected case)

(3) THAKUR SHRI BANKEY BIHARIJI MAHARAJ THROUGH SHEBAIT HIMANSHU GOSWAMI AND ANR. Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 734/2025

(4) ISHWAR CHANDA SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., Diary No. 28487-2025 (and connected case)

(5) ISHWAR CHANDA SHARMA Versus DEVENDRA KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS., Diary No. 39950-2025

(6) HARIDASI SAMPRADAY THROUGH DAMANDEEP SINGH AND AMAR NATH GAUTAM SHISHYA OF HARIDASI SAMPRADAY AND ORS. Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 707/2025

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 785