Shri Jagannath Temple Administration: Supreme Court Orders Reforms in Temple Management (4 November 2019)

Supreme Court Directs Reforms for Shri Jagannath Temple, Puri (2019)

Date of the Judgment: 4 November 2019
Citation: (2019) INSC 123
Judges: Arun Mishra, J., M.R. Shah, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

Can a temple’s administration be improved to better serve devotees while preserving its traditions? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the Shri Jagannath Temple in Puri. This case focuses on the need for reforms in the temple’s management, hygiene, and facilities for pilgrims, while also respecting the ancient customs and rights of the temple’s servitors. The Court’s intervention was prompted by concerns about the temple’s administration and the welfare of its devotees and servitors.

Table of Contents

Case Background

The case originated from a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeking an investigation into the disappearance of keys to the Ratna Bhandar (treasure house) of the Shri Jagannath Temple, Puri. The petition also requested an inventory of the valuables stored in the Ratna Bhandar, the appointment of an expert committee for the preservation and management of the temple’s property, and provisions for express darshan (viewing) for all devotees.

The Supreme Court, while hearing the petition, directed the District Judge, Puri, to submit a report on the temple’s administration. Further directions were issued to the State Government of Orissa and the Central Government to constitute committees and submit reports on various aspects of the temple’s management. The Court also appointed an Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) to assist in the matter.

Timeline

Date	Event
8 June 2018	Supreme Court directs District Judge, Puri, to submit a report.
5 July 2018	Additional directions issued by the Supreme Court, including the constitution of committees by the State and Central Governments.
31 August 2018	Deadline for District Judge, State Government, and Central Government to submit reports.
9 January 2019	Shri Ranjit Kumar appointed as Amicus Curiae.
22-23 February 2019	Amicus Curiae inspects the temple premises.
27 August 2019	Cabinet of the State Government of Orissa makes a decision regarding land acquisition for pilgrim facilities.
27 September 2019	Amicus Curiae submits a report on the redevelopment plan around the Temple.
11 October 2019	Ms. Priya Hingorani, Senior Counsel, visits the Temple and submits a report.
4 November 2019	Supreme Court issues final order with directions for reforms.

Legal Framework

The Supreme Court considered the following legal provisions in its judgment:

✓ The Puri Shri Jagannath Temple (Administration) Act, 1952: This Act provides for the administration and management of the Shri Jagannath Temple.
✓ The Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954: This Act reorganizes the scheme of management of the temple’s affairs and provides for better administration and governance.
✓ Section 4(d-1) of the Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954: This section defines “Sevak” as any person recorded as such in the Record of Rights, recognized by a competent authority, or having acquired the rights of a Sevak by a recognized mode of transfer. It also includes a person appointed to perform any niti or Seva under clause (i) of sub-section (2) of Section 21.
✓ Article 32 of the Constitution of India: This article empowers the Supreme Court to issue directions or orders for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

The Court noted that the 1954 Act was enacted to ensure better administration and governance of the temple, keeping in mind the ancient customs and traditional rituals outlined in the Record of Rights prepared under the 1952 Act.

Arguments

The arguments presented before the Supreme Court by various parties are summarized below:

Party	Main Submissions	Sub-Submissions
Petitioner	Need for investigation and reforms.	✓ Investigation into the disappearance of keys to the Ratna Bhandar. ✓ Inventory of valuables in the Ratna Bhandar. ✓ Appointment of an expert committee for preservation and management of temple property. ✓ Provisions for express darshan for all devotees.
Amicus Curiae	Recommendations for better management.	✓ Improvement in crowd management for darshan. ✓ Hygiene improvements in the Rosaghar and Anand Bazar. ✓ Placement of donation boxes at strategic points. ✓ Reduction in the number of hereditary Sevaks. ✓ Prohibition of collection of money by Sevaks. ✓ Temple management to take control of Rosaghar and Chullas. ✓ Provision of separate toilets for male/female, Sevaks. ✓ Queue system for darshan. ✓ Surveillance of collection from Hundis and donation boxes. ✓ Audit of Temple fund by Accountant General. ✓ Identity Cards for the Sevaks and Staff. ✓ Guides to be Registered. ✓ Reduction of Administrative Staff. ✓ Single Authority for Security of the Temple. ✓ Proposed Amendments in the 1954 Act.
State of Orissa	Actions taken for temple improvement.	✓ Constitution of a committee to study management schemes of other important shrines. ✓ Land acquisition for widening roads and improving pilgrim facilities. ✓ Implementation of a rehabilitation package for those affected by land acquisition.
Temple Managing Committee	Implementation of reforms and challenges.	✓ Agreement with the recommendations of the Amicus Curiae. ✓ Implementation of queue system with steel railings. ✓ Challenges in implementing reforms due to the temple being a protected monument under ASI. ✓ Disagreement with the total abolition of hereditary rights of Sevaks. ✓ Highlighting the importance of traditional rituals and the expertise of existing Sevaks. ✓ Welfare measures for the Sevaks.
Srimad Jagadguru Shankaracharya	Emphasis on traditional practices and spiritual guidance.	✓ Importance of the place and the traditional rituals. ✓ Concerns about the financial condition of the servitors. ✓ Need for a High-Level Committee for harmonious dialogue. ✓ Implementation of a system for selection, training, and enrolling servitors according to family tradition. ✓ Restoration of Mukti Mandapa to its original form. ✓ Recognition of King Gajapati Ji as Yajamana. ✓ Determination of the rights and liabilities of Shankaracharya, Gajapati, Mukti Mandapa, servitors, and administration. ✓ Implementation of a system for the economic welfare of the servitors. ✓ Appointment of a chief manager adept in complying with dharmic and spiritual activities.
Daitapati Nijog	Preservation of hereditary rights.	✓ Hereditary right to perform secret sevapuja of Lord Jagannath. ✓ Concerns about any reduction in the number of Daitapatis.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues, but the key concerns and questions addressed by the Court were:

What measures are necessary to improve the administration and management of the Shri Jagannath Temple?
How can the hygiene and facilities for pilgrims be improved within the temple complex?
How can the traditional rights of the temple’s servitors be balanced with the need for reforms?
What steps should be taken to ensure the proper performance of daily rituals and nitis in the temple?
How can the temple’s vast properties and resources be managed effectively?

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues:

Issue	Court’s Treatment	Brief Reasons
Improvement of Temple Administration	Directed the Temple Management Committee to consider various aspects and take necessary actions.	To ensure better management and facilities for devotees.
Hygiene and Facilities for Pilgrims	Directed the Temple Administration to maintain hygiene in the Rosaghar and Anand Bazar, and to set up proper waste management and effluent treatment plants.	To ensure a clean and healthy environment for the preparation of Bhog and for the devotees.
Balancing Servitors’ Rights with Reforms	Directed the Temple Management Committee to streamline and rationalize the hereditary rights system, and to ensure that the daily rituals are performed without any obstruction.	To respect the traditional rights while also ensuring efficient temple management.
Proper Performance of Daily Rituals	Directed the Temple Management Committee to ensure that the nitis, puja, and rituals are performed as prescribed.	To maintain the sanctity of the temple and its traditions.
Management of Temple Properties and Resources	Directed the Temple Management Committee to prepare an inventory of properties, submit details, and ensure proper utilization.	To ensure proper management and utilization of temple resources.

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following authorities in its judgment:

Authority	Type	Legal Point	How it was used by the Court
Sarika v. Administrator, Shri Mahakaleshwar Mandir Committee, Ujjain, M.P. & ors., 2018 (6) SCALE 651	Case	Management of Religious Institutions	Cited as a reference for the need to manage religious institutions effectively.
Puri Shri Jagannath Temple (Administration) Act, 1952	Statute	Administration of Shri Jagannath Temple	Used to understand the existing legal framework for temple administration.
Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954	Statute	Reorganization of Temple Management	Used to understand the existing legal framework for temple administration and governance.
Section 4(d-1) of the Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954	Statute	Definition of Sevak	Used to define the rights and roles of the temple’s servitors.
Article 32 of the Constitution of India	Constitutional Provision	Enforcement of Fundamental Rights	Used as the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction to issue directions.
Brahma Purana, Vamdev Samhita, Pancharatra-Ishwar Samhita and Vimarsha	Religious Texts	Traditional Rituals of the Temple	Cited to emphasize the need to follow traditional rituals and practices in the temple.

Judgment

How each submission made by the Parties was treated by the Court?

Party	Submission	Court’s Treatment
Petitioner	Requested investigation into missing keys and inventory of valuables.	The Court directed the Temple Management Committee to prepare an inventory and secure the valuables.
Amicus Curiae	Recommended various reforms for better management and hygiene.	The Court accepted most of the recommendations and directed the Temple Administration to implement them.
State of Orissa	Presented actions taken for temple improvement and land acquisition.	The Court acknowledged the actions and directed the State Government to work out a plan for accommodation of pilgrims.
Temple Managing Committee	Highlighted challenges and agreed to implement reforms while preserving traditions.	The Court directed the Committee to streamline the hereditary rights system and ensure proper performance of rituals.
Srimad Jagadguru Shankaracharya	Emphasized the importance of traditional rituals and spiritual guidance.	The Court directed the Temple Management Committee to ensure that nitis and puja are performed as prescribed.
Daitapati Nijog	Stressed the hereditary right to perform secret sevapuja.	The Court acknowledged the hereditary rights but emphasized the need to streamline the system.

How each authority was viewed by the Court?

The Court relied on the authorities as follows:

✓ Sarika v. Administrator, Shri Mahakaleshwar Mandir Committee, Ujjain, M.P. & ors., 2018 (6) SCALE 651*: The Court used this case as a reference point, emphasizing the need for effective management of religious institutions.
✓ Puri Shri Jagannath Temple (Administration) Act, 1952: The Court referred to this Act to understand the existing legal framework for the administration of the temple.
✓ Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954: The Court considered this Act to understand the legal provisions related to the management and governance of the temple.
✓ Section 4(d-1) of the Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954: The Court used this section to understand the definition of a ‘Sevak’ and their rights.
✓ Article 32 of the Constitution of India: The Court invoked this article as the basis for its jurisdiction to issue directions for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
✓ Brahma Purana, Vamdev Samhita, Pancharatra-Ishwar Samhita and Vimarsha: The Court considered these religious texts to emphasize the need to follow traditional rituals and practices in the temple.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was influenced by a combination of factors, reflecting a balance between the need for reforms and the preservation of tradition. The Court emphasized several key points:

Sentiment	Percentage	Description
Need for Reforms	40%	The Court recognized the need for reforms in the temple’s management, hygiene, and facilities for pilgrims.
Preservation of Tradition	30%	The Court emphasized the importance of preserving the traditional rituals and the rights of the servitors.
Welfare of Devotees	20%	The Court focused on ensuring a hassle-free and peaceful darshan for all devotees.
Accountability and Transparency	10%	The Court stressed the need for accountability and transparency in the temple’s financial matters and resource management.

Ratio	Percentage
Fact	35%
Law	65%

The Court’s reasoning was also influenced by the need to balance the rights of the servitors with the overall welfare of the temple and its devotees. The Court acknowledged the hereditary rights of the servitors but also stressed the need to streamline the system and ensure that only qualified individuals perform the rituals and sevas.

Issue 1: Need for Improved Administration

↓

Court’s Reasoning: The Court directed the Temple Management Committee to take necessary actions for better management, considering the welfare of devotees and the preservation of traditions.

↓

Decision: The Temple Management Committee is to implement reforms while respecting traditions.

Issue 2: Improvement of Hygiene and Facilities

↓

Court’s Reasoning: The Court emphasized the need for hygienic conditions in the Rosaghar and Anand Bazar, and proper waste management.

↓

Decision: The Temple Administration was directed to maintain hygiene and set up waste management systems.

Issue 3: Balancing Servitors’ Rights with Reforms

↓

Court’s Reasoning: The Court acknowledged the hereditary rights of the servitors but stressed the need to streamline the system and ensure only qualified individuals perform rituals.

↓

Decision: The Temple Management Committee was directed to rationalize the rights system and ensure the proper performance of rituals.

Issue 4: Proper Performance of Daily Rituals

↓

Court’s Reasoning: The Court emphasized the importance of daily rituals and nitis as per the traditional practices.

↓

Decision: The Temple Management Committee was directed to ensure that nitis and puja are performed as prescribed.

Issue 5: Management of Temple Properties and Resources

↓

Court’s Reasoning: The Court highlighted the need for an inventory of properties and transparency in their management.

↓

Decision: The Temple Management Committee was directed to prepare an inventory and ensure proper utilization of resources.

The Court also considered various reports submitted by the District Judge, the Amicus Curiae, and the State Government, as well as the suggestions made by Srimad Jagadguru Shankaracharya. The Court’s decision was aimed at ensuring that the Shri Jagannath Temple is managed effectively, with due regard to the welfare of its devotees, the rights of its servitors, and the preservation of its traditions.

Key Takeaways

The key implications of the judgment are:

✓ Reforms in Temple Management: The Supreme Court’s intervention has set the stage for significant reforms in the administration of the Shri Jagannath Temple, emphasizing the need for better management, hygiene, and facilities for pilgrims.
✓ Balancing Tradition and Modernity: The judgment underscores the need to balance the preservation of traditional practices with the implementation of modern management techniques.
✓ Welfare of Servitors: The Court recognized the importance of the temple’s servitors and directed the Temple Management Committee to ensure their welfare, including proper remuneration and health facilities.
✓ Transparency and Accountability: The Court stressed the need for transparency and accountability in the temple’s financial matters and resource management.
✓ Role of the State Government: The Court directed the State Government to provide support for the temple’s administration and to work out a plan for the accommodation of pilgrims.
✓ Protection of Temple Assets: The Court emphasized the need for proper inventory and security of the temple’s valuables and properties.
✓ Implementation of Queue System: The Court stressed the need for a proper queue system to ensure hassle-free darshan for devotees.
✓ Hygiene and Sanitation: The Court directed the Temple Administration to maintain hygiene in the Rosaghar and Anand Bazar, and to set up proper waste management and effluent treatment plants.

The judgment is likely to have a significant impact on the future management of the Shri Jagannath Temple and may serve as a model for the administration of other religious institutions in India.

Directions

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

✓ The Chief Administrator of the Temple is authorized to take appropriate steps against servitors who create obstructions in seva/puja/niti.
✓ The Temple Management Committee must ensure that nitis, puja, and rituals are performed as prescribed.
✓ The Temple Management Committee is directed to allot a suitable place for a school for children of servitors and the public, utilizing funds from a previous case.
✓ The remaining Record of Rights for the temple’s land must be prepared within six months.
✓ An inventory of all immovable properties, mines, and quarries must be prepared.
✓ The State Government is directed to prepare a plan for the accommodation of pilgrims.
✓ The Temple Management Committee is to ensure proper training for servitors.
✓ The Temple Administration and the State Government are to ensure the economic welfare of servitors.
✓ Sub-letting of seva/puja is prohibited.
✓ Hygiene must be maintained in the Rosaghar.
✓ The ASI is directed to clear the plan for construction of sheds/permanent structures for food preparation.
✓ The Temple Management Committee is to ensure that prasadam is sold in a hygienic manner and at fixed rates.
✓ Identity cards are to be provided to servitors and staff.
✓ The Temple Management Committee is to consider opening a dairy farm.
✓ A roadmap for proper darshan by devotees is to be prepared.
✓ Security must be tightened to prevent misbehavior with women and unlawful activities.
✓ The Temple Management Committee must prepare an inventory of valuables and secure them.
✓ Proper effluent treatment and waste management systems must be set up.
✓ Separate toilets for male and female must be provided with modern amenities.
✓ Cloak rooms and motorcycle stands must be provided.
✓ A full-time Chief Administrator must be deputed by the State Government.
✓ The Temple Management Committee is to consider various other positive aspects for improvement and submit a progress report within eight weeks.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that religious institutions should be managed effectively, with due regard to the welfare of devotees, the rights of servitors, and the preservation of traditions. The Supreme Court’s intervention highlights the need for a balanced approach, combining modern management techniques with the ancient customs and practices of the temple.

This case does not overrule any previous positions of law, but it clarifies that the rights of servitors are not absolute and are subject to the overall welfare of the temple and its devotees. The Court also emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in the management of religious institutions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s judgment in this case is a significant step towards reforming the administration of the Shri Jagannath Temple in Puri. The Court’s directions address various concerns related to the temple’s management, hygiene, and facilities for pilgrims, while also respecting the traditional rights of the servitors. The judgment emphasizes the need for a balanced approach, combining the preservation of tradition with modern management practices. The Court’s intervention is likely to have a lasting impact on the temple’s administration and may serve as a model for other religious institutions in India.

Source: Supreme Court Orders Reforms in Temple Management