Supreme Court Directs Measures to Preserve Mahakaleshwar Temple: Sarika vs. Administrator (2020)

Date of the Judgment: September 1, 2020
Citation: M.A. No.1235 OF 2019 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.4676 OF 2018
Judges: Arun Mishra, J., B.R. Gavai, J., Krishna Murari, J.
Can the sacred Shivalinga at the Mahakaleshwar Temple be protected from further erosion? The Supreme Court of India has been actively monitoring the situation, and in this judgment, it issued a series of directives to the Temple Committee and other authorities to ensure the preservation of the temple and its deity. The core issue revolves around the continuous deterioration of the Shivalinga due to various factors, including offerings and mechanical abrasion. The bench, comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai, and Krishna Murari, delivered this order.

Case Background

The Supreme Court of India has been monitoring the compliance of its judgment in Civil Appeal No. 4676/2018, dated May 2, 2018, concerning the Shri Mahakaleshwar Temple in Ujjain. An Expert Committee, consisting of members from the Archaeological Survey of India and the Geological Survey of India, was appointed to assess and recommend measures to prevent the erosion of the Shivalinga. The committee’s inspections revealed ongoing erosion, raising concerns about the temple’s preservation. The court noted that the erosion was a continuous process, with visible deterioration observed in photographs taken in July 2020. The court also expressed concern regarding the destruction of the Lingam at Omkareshwar Temple due to reckless offerings. The pH value of Bhasma Aarti was noted to be 10.51, which was reactive to the Shivalinga, causing deterioration. There were also concerns about mechanical erosion due to the weight of Mund Mala and Serpakarnahas, despite their weight being reduced. The court also noted modern construction within the temple premises, which needed to be removed, as well as the poor look of the ancient heritage place due to the painting of the walls with colours.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The Supreme Court has been monitoring the implementation of its previous order in Civil Appeal No. 4676/2018. The court appointed an Expert Committee to assess the condition of the Shivalinga and suggest remedial measures. The Expert Committee submitted a report after inspecting the temple on January 19, 2019, highlighting continuous erosion. Following this, the court requested an Action Taken Report from the Temple Committee, which responded with measures taken based on the Expert Committee’s recommendations. The court also took note of a report dated July 28, 2019, indicating that the Chandranageshwar Temple within the premises also required repair work. Additionally, the court considered a structural assessment proposal from CBRI, Roorkee, and a detailed development plan from Ujjain Smart City Limited.

Legal Framework

There are no specific legal provisions mentioned in the judgment. The legal framework is based on the Supreme Court’s inherent powers to monitor and issue directions to protect and preserve places of religious and historical significance. The court’s intervention is aimed at ensuring the proper management and preservation of the Mahakaleshwar Temple, a site of great religious importance.

Arguments

The Temple Committee submitted that they were taking steps to preserve the Shivalinga, such as covering it with cloth during Bhasma Aarti and cleaning it with RO water. They also mentioned regulating entry into the Garbh Griha and restoring the original work, which was in progress. The Temple Committee also highlighted the need for further inspection by the expert team, as the last inspection was 1½ years ago. They also requested directions to ensure that no visitors rub the Shivalinga and that the Poojaries and Purohits ensure compliance. The Temple Committee also requested that the court direct the Central Government to bear the expenses for the structural assessment by CBRI, Roorkee. They also requested funds from the State or Central Government for repairs and maintenance, including the preservation of Chandranageshwar Temple. Additionally, they sought the removal of encroachments within 500 meters of the temple.

The State of Madhya Pradesh presented a detailed plan prepared by Ujjain Smart City Limited (USCL) for the comprehensive development of the Shri Mahakaleshwar Temple and surrounding areas, known as the “Mahakaal Rudrasagar Integrated Development Approach” (MRIDA).

There was no innovativeness mentioned in the arguments by either side.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame issues in this order. However, the core issues addressed by the Court were:

• What steps need to be taken to prevent the deterioration of the Shivalinga?
• What measures are necessary to preserve the temple structure, including the Chandranageshwar Temple?
• How to regulate offerings and rituals to minimize damage to the Shivalinga?
• How to ensure the structural stability of the temple?
• How to remove encroachments within 500 meters of the temple?

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The judgment does not cite any specific cases, books, or legal provisions. The court’s directions are based on its inherent powers to ensure the preservation of heritage sites and places of religious importance.

Judgment

The Supreme Court issued a series of directions to preserve the Mahakaleshwar Temple. The court directed the Expert Committee to visit the temple and submit a report by December 15, 2020, on steps to prevent the deterioration of the Shivalinga and preserve the temple structure. The court also ordered a yearly survey and report submission.

To preserve the Shivalingam, the court directed that no devotee should rub the Shivalingam, the Temple Committee should ensure the pH value of Bhasma during the Bhasma Aarti is improved, the weight of Mund Mala and Serpakarnahas should be further reduced, and only a limited quantity of pure milk should be allowed for pouring. The court also directed that Poojaries, Janeupati, Khutpati, Purohits, and their authorized representatives should ensure that no visitor or devotee rubs the Shivalingam. The entire proceedings of Puja and Archana in Garbh Griha are to be video recorded for 24 hours and preserved for at least six months. The court also directed that no Panchamrita should be poured on the Shivalingam by any devotee and that the Temple Committee should provide pure milk from its resources for offering.

The court further directed the Temple Committee to provide filtered and purified water from Koti Thirth Kund and maintain the required pH value. The CBRI, Roorkee, was directed to submit a project report regarding structural stability within six months, and the Central Government was directed to pay Rs. 41.30 Lakhs to CBRI. Ujjain Smart City Ltd. was directed to undertake the Mahakaal Rudrasagar Integrated Development Approach (Phase I and Phase II) and submit a detailed project report within six weeks. The court also directed the Collector to prepare a comprehensive plan for repairs, maintenance, and improvement with the help of the Superintendent Engineer and available Architect. The court also directed the removal of modern additions and restoration of original work, including the removal of eyesore paintings by December 15, 2020. The Collector and Superintendent of Police of Ujjain were directed to ensure the removal of encroachments within 500 meters of the temple premises by December 15, 2020. The court also directed the preparation and implementation of a comprehensive plan for the preservation and maintenance of Chandranageshwar Temple. The court further directed the Temple Committee to ensure that any slippery areas in Garbh Griha are addressed and that necessary religious rituals are performed regularly.

Authorities and their usage by the Court:

• Expert Committee Report dated 19.01.2019: The court relied on this report to understand the extent of erosion and the necessary remedial measures.
• Temple Committee Report: The court considered this report to understand the steps taken by the Temple Committee and to issue further directions.
• CBRI, Roorkee Proposal dated 17.09.2019: The court considered this proposal for the structural assessment of the temple and directed CBRI to submit a project report.
• Ujjain Smart City Ltd. Letter dated 27.08.2020: The court considered this letter for the development plan of the temple and surrounding area and directed USCL to undertake the MRIDA project.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court was primarily concerned with the continuous erosion of the Shivalinga and the need to preserve the Mahakaleshwar Temple. The court emphasized the importance of maintaining the sanctity of the temple and preventing further damage. The court’s reasoning was based on the reports of the Expert Committee, which highlighted the ongoing deterioration due to various factors, including offerings, mechanical abrasion, and the chemical composition of materials used in rituals. The court also considered the submissions of the Temple Committee and the State of Madhya Pradesh, which indicated efforts being made to address the issues. The court’s directions were aimed at implementing a comprehensive plan to protect the Shivalinga and preserve the temple structure.

The Court’s reasoning was driven by the factual reports of the Expert Committee and the need to take immediate action to prevent further damage to the Shivalinga. While there were no specific legal provisions cited, the court’s inherent powers to protect heritage sites and places of religious importance were the basis for its intervention.

The court did not consider any alternative interpretations and directly issued directions based on the reports and submissions made.

The court’s decision was aimed at preventing further deterioration of the Shivalinga and ensuring the preservation of the Mahakaleshwar Temple. The court’s directions were comprehensive and included measures to regulate offerings, improve the quality of materials used in rituals, and ensure the structural stability of the temple. The court also directed the removal of encroachments and the restoration of the original work in the temple.

“The matter is of grave concern as due to reckless offerings, the Lingam of Omkareshwar Temple was destroyed.”

“The Report indicates that the pH value of Bhasma Aarti stands at 10.51, which is required to be improved and is reactive to Cryptocrystalline siliceous cementing material of orthoquartzite at room temperature and causing deterioration in Jyotirlingam.”

“Poojaries, Janeupati, Khutpati, Purohits, and their authorized representatives to strictly ensure that no visitor or devotee rub the Shivalingam at any cost.”

There were no majority or minority opinions in this case. The bench unanimously agreed on the directions.

The court’s reasoning is based on the need to protect the Shivalinga and the temple from further damage. The court’s directions are aimed at implementing a comprehensive plan to address the issues identified by the Expert Committee and other reports. The court has also set timelines for compliance and has scheduled further monitoring of the case.

The court’s directions have significant implications for the future management and preservation of the Mahakaleshwar Temple. The court’s emphasis on scientific measures and the regulation of rituals is likely to set a precedent for the preservation of other heritage sites and places of religious importance.

The court did not introduce any new doctrines or legal principles. The court’s intervention is based on its inherent powers to protect heritage sites and places of religious importance.

Key Takeaways

• ✓ Devotees are prohibited from rubbing the Shivalinga.
• ✓ The Temple Committee must ensure the pH value of Bhasma is improved.
• ✓ The weight of Mund Mala and Serpakarnahas must be reduced.
• ✓ Only a limited quantity of pure milk is allowed for pouring on the Shivalinga.
• ✓ Poojaries and Purohits are responsible for ensuring no rubbing of the Shivalinga by devotees.
• ✓ Rituals in Garbh Griha must be video recorded for 24 hours and preserved for six months.
• ✓ No Panchamrita is allowed to be poured on the Shivalinga by devotees.
• ✓ The Temple Committee must provide pure milk for offerings.
• ✓ Filtered and purified water from Koti Thirth Kund must be used.
• ✓ CBRI, Roorkee, must submit a project report on structural stability.
• ✓ Ujjain Smart City Ltd. must undertake the MRIDA project.
• ✓ Encroachments within 500 meters of the temple must be removed.

The judgment is likely to have a significant impact on how temples and other heritage sites are managed and preserved in India. The emphasis on scientific measures and the regulation of rituals is likely to be followed in other similar cases.

Directions

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

• The Expert Committee shall visit the temple and submit a report by December 15, 2020.
• The Expert Committee shall conduct a yearly survey and submit a report to the Court.
• No rubbing of the Shivalingam by devotees.
• The Temple Committee to ensure the pH value of Bhasma is improved.
• The weight of Mund Mala and Serpakarnahas to be reduced.
• Only a limited quantity of pure milk to be allowed for pouring.
• Poojaries and Purohits to ensure no rubbing of the Shivalingam by devotees.
• Video recording of Puja and Archana in Garbh Griha for 24 hours.
• No Panchamrita to be poured on the Shivalingam by devotees.
• The Temple Committee to provide pure milk for offerings.
• Filtered and purified water from Koti Thirth Kund to be used.
• CBRI, Roorkee, to submit a project report on structural stability within six months.
• Ujjain Smart City Ltd. to undertake the MRIDA project and submit a detailed project report within six weeks.
• The Collector to prepare a comprehensive plan for repairs and maintenance.
• Removal of modern additions and restoration of original work by December 15, 2020.
• Removal of encroachments within 500 meters of the temple by December 15, 2020.
• Preparation and implementation of a plan for the preservation of Chandranageshwar Temple.
• Address slippery areas in Garbh Griha.
• Regular performance of necessary religious rituals.

Specific Amendments Analysis

There are no specific amendments discussed in the judgment.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of the case is that the Supreme Court has the power to issue directions to preserve and protect heritage sites and places of religious importance. The court’s directions are aimed at implementing a comprehensive plan to address the issues identified by the Expert Committee and other reports. There is no change in the previous position of law, but the judgment reinforces the court’s role in monitoring and directing the preservation of such sites.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Sarika vs. Administrator, Mahakaleshwar Mandir Committee, Ujjain (M.P.) & Ors. is a significant step towards preserving the Mahakaleshwar Temple and its Shivalinga. The court issued a series of directions to the Temple Committee, Expert Committee, and government authorities to ensure the preservation of the temple and its deity. The court’s directions are aimed at regulating offerings, improving the quality of materials used in rituals, ensuring the structural stability of the temple, and removing encroachments. The judgment highlights the court’s role in protecting heritage sites and places of religious importance and is likely to have a significant impact on how such sites are managed and preserved in India.