The Uttar Pradesh government on Tuesday defended its move to introduce the Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025, asserting before the Supreme Court that the law aims solely at improving management of the iconic temple in Vrindavan, not interfering in its ownership.
Appearing before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, ASG KM Nataraj clarified that the ordinance arose from a public interest litigation in the Allahabad High Court seeking better administration of the heavily visited shrine.
“The ordinance is unrelated to pending ownership disputes. It addresses concerns raised in the High Court about temple management,” Nataraj told the bench, adding that the temple receives up to 3 lakh devotees weekly.
SC Flags Secrecy, Pauses Corridor Project
The top court, however, expressed concern over the state’s “clandestine” approach and on August 4 put on hold its earlier approval for developing a corridor around the temple. The May 15 order had allowed the UP government to use temple funds to acquire adjacent land—provided it was registered in the deity’s name.
Now, the bench has paused that approval, questioning the urgency and lack of transparency in the state’s actions.
Management Shift Under Lens
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the temple’s current management, sought time until August 8 to present an alternative model for overseeing temple affairs.
Meanwhile, the court hinted at forming an interim management committee, potentially headed by a retired judge, to supervise temple operations while legal issues are examined.
Petition Calls Ordinance A Takeover Attempt
A petition challenging the ordinance argues that it effectively enables the state to take control of the temple, bypassing its traditional caretakers. Filed through advocate Tanvi Dubey, it warns the move threatens the shrine’s heritage and long-standing customs.
Court clarified it was not ruling on the ordinance’s constitutionality for now, leaving that question to the High Court.
The matter will return to court on August 8, with the petitioners expected to submit their proposal for a revised administrative setup for the temple.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
