SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
9th May, 1952
FAZL ALI, B.K. MUKHERJEA AND S.R. DAS JJ.
Nar Hari Shastri and others, Appellants
Versus
Shri Badrinath Temple Committee, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 105 of 1951.
Advocate appeared
Shri K. S. Krishnaswamy Iyengar, Senior Advocate, (Shri R. C. Ghatak, and Shri N. C. Sen, Advocates, with him), instructed by Shri C. P. Lal, Agent for Appellants; Shri S. K. Dar, Senior Advocate (Shri D. D. Uniyal, Advocate, with him), instructed by Shri S. S. Shukla, Agent, for Respondent.
-right to worship is a suit of civil nature Nar Hari v. Badri Nath Temple, AIR 1952 SC 245. A suit for recovery of arrears of salary - State of Bihar v. Abdul Majeed, AIR 1954 SC 245.
-is a dispute of civil nature - Nar Hari v. Badri Nath Temple, AIR 1952 SC 245. Interference with the right to worship raises a dispute of civil nature - Ugam Singh v. Kesrimal, AIR 1971 SC 2540.
Judgment
B. K. MUKHERJEA J. : The sanctity which orthodox Hindu thought and feeling attribute to visiting of sacred places is nowhere better illustrated than in the vast concourse of pilgrims, who are attracted every year, from all parts of India, to the mountain shrines at Badrinath, situated, high up in the Himalayas, in the District of Garhwal. The place to which the appellation of Puri is given, contains a number of temple as but the principal temple is the one where the idol Badrinath along with some other subsidiary, idols, is installed. This main temple is divided into three portions or apartments, and to the innermost portion which is considered to be the holiest and where the deities are located, no pilgrim is allowed access. The pilgrims gather in the middle room; they have darshan or look at the deity from this place and there also they make their offerings and perform other rites of individual worship. The last room is an outer apartment which is used as a sort of waiting place for the worshippers. Outside the temple and at a short distance from it there is a hot spring known as Tapta Kundu where the worshippers take ceremonial bath before they enter into the temple and to the Tapta Kundu they come back again after the ceremonies are over.
2. The temple at Badrinath is an ancient institution and is admittedly a public place of worship for the Hindus. The chief priest or ministrant of the temple is known by the name of Rawal who originally looked after both the spiritual and temporal affairs of the idol subject to certain rights of supervision and control exercisable by the Tehri Durbar which, however, were not very clearly defined.
3. It appears that there was a Scheme for the management of the temple framed by the Commissioner of Kumaun Division within whose jurisdiction Badrinath is situated, some time in the year 1899. Under this Scheme, the Rawal was to be the sole trustee of the Badrinath temple and its properties, and the entire management was entrusted to him subject to his keeping accounts, which he had to submit for approval by the Tehri Durbar, and making arrangements for the disposal and safe custody of cash receipts and other non-perishable valuables. This Scheme apparently did not work well and led to constant friction between the Rawal on the one hand and the Tehri Durbar on the other. This unsatisfactory state of affairs led to public agitation and demand for reforms, and in 1939, the U. P. Legislature passed the Sri Badrinath Temple Act, the object of which was to remove the chief defects in the existing system of management. The Act restricts the Rawal to his priestly duties and the secular management is placed in the hands of a small committee, the members of which are partly elected and partly nominated powers being reserved to the Government to take steps against the committee itself, if it is found guilty of mis-management. The Act preserves the traditional control of the Tehri Durbar.
4. The appellants before us, who were the plaintiffs in the trial Court, claim to be Pandas associated with the Badrinath temple. The Pandas are Brahmans belonging to the priestly class and are found to exist in almost all important public places of worship in India. They are not temple priests in the proper sense of the expression and have nothing to do with the regular worship of the idol which is carried on by the Shebayat, the High priest or the manager as the case may be. Their chief duty consists in acting as guides or escorts of the pilgrims, and taking them to various places of worship acquainting them at the same time with detailed information regarding the reputed sanctity of each. They look after the comforts of the pilgrims and make arrangements for their boarding and lodging and also act as Tirtha Purohits, in which capacity they assist the pilgrims in the performance of various acts of individual worship as distinguished from the general worship which is conducted by or on behalf of the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.