Defining 'VIP' for Temple Entry is Administrator's Discretion, Not for Writ Court to Decide Under Article 226: Madhya Pradesh High Court - 2025-08-28

Latest Legal Developments.

MP High Court Upholds Administrator's Discretion in Granting VIP Access to Mahakaleshwar Temple Sanctum

Indore, MP – The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in a significant ruling, has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenged the practice of allowing certain "VIPs" special access to the Garbhagriha (sanctum sanctorum) of the renowned Mahakaleshwar Temple. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi , held that determining who qualifies as a VIP for temple entry is a matter of administrative discretion and cannot be adjudicated by a writ court.

---

Background of the Case

The writ petition (W.P. No. 32998 of 2025) was filed by petitioner Darpan Awasthi, who, based on newspaper reports, alleged discriminatory practices at the Mahakaleshwar Temple. The core grievance was that while the general public was restricted from entering the sanctum to offer water to the deity, certain individuals deemed VIPs were granted this privilege, leading to an arbitrary and discriminatory system.

The petitioner stated that his attempts to get information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act were denied by the Managing Administrator of the temple.

Arguments Presented

The petitioner argued that allowing special access to a select few violated the principle of equality and constituted arbitrary action by the temple administration. He presented the minutes of the Mahakaleshwar Mandir's Managing Committee, which did not contain a specific prohibition on entering the Garbhagriha .

The respondent, represented by the Deputy Advocate General, defended the temple's administrative procedure, highlighting that the authority to grant such permissions rests with the Collector and the Administrator of the Management Committee.

Court's Rationale and Key Observations

The High Court decisively sided with the temple administration, emphasizing the discretionary nature of the power to grant access. The bench noted that the term "VIP" is not defined in any statute or rule, making it a fluid concept dependent on context.

In a pivotal excerpt from the judgment, the court observed:

"The VIPs can enter in the Garbhagriha with a permission of Collector and Administrator of Management Committee of Mahakaleshwar Mandir, therefore, who is VIP in the opinion of Collector and Administrator of Mahakaleshwar cannot be decided in a writ petition, which is purely a discretion of the competent authority."

The Court further elaborated that the status of a person can be assessed on a case-by-case basis by the competent authority.

"On a particular day looking to the status of the person, the Collector shall be the competent authority to treat him VIP for the purpose of offering water to the deity. There is no permanent list or protocol published by Managing Committee of the VIPs persons. Hence, the writ Court cannot decide as to who is VIP amongst the persons visiting Mahakaleshwar Temple on a particular day."

The bench also pointed out that such systems of managed access are prevalent in religious places across India. Significantly, the court questioned the petitioner's standing, suggesting a personal grievance rather than a genuine public interest, stating, "The petitioner appears to be a personal aggrieved person, hence, writ petition at the instance of petitioner is not maintainable."

Final Decision

Based on these grounds, the High Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, affirming that the discretionary powers of the temple's administrative authorities to grant special access are not subject to judicial review through a writ petition. No order as to costs was made.