Stakeholder involvement in redevelopment projects is essential, ensuring adequate arrangements for public services and accountability in financial management for religious institutions.

Headnote:(A) Court Procedure - Hearing mode - The Court conducted proceedings via hybrid mode, allowing both physical and virtual appearances. (Para 1)

(B) Administration of Religious Institutions - The redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir includes provisions for the participation of pujaris and dharamshala occupants, with emphasis on accommodating the interests of stakeholders, making relevant arrangements for devotees. (Paras 5, 9)

(C) Financial Management - Directions were issued for the release of funds to the architect for development, ensuring direct payments to contractors and subcontractors. (Para 11)

(D) Regulatory Compliance - The court directed obtaining necessary approvals for the Kalkaji Mandir Fund under the Income Tax Act, 1961, indicating the importance of compliance in financial operations. (Paras 12)

Facts of the case:
This matter concerns multiple applications related to the redevelopment plan of Kalkaji Mandir, highlighting a significant influx of devotees and the necessity for infrastructure improvements.

Issues: Key issues involve the submission and implementation of redevelopment plans, stakeholder participation, and financial management for the temple's redevelopment.

Findings of Court:
The court observed the need for participation from the pujaris and dharamshala occupants in the redevelopment discussions and set forth procedural and financial directives for completing the redevelopment.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that stakeholder involvement is crucial in redevelopment efforts and instructed comprehensive measures for accommodating devotees' needs.

Result: The case is scheduled for further hearing on 20th May 2022.

Table of Content
1. hearing conducted through hybrid mode. (Para 1 , 2)
2. status and planning for kalkaji mandir redevelopment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. participation of pujaris and baaridars in redevelopment. (Para 8)
4. administration directives for boundary wall construction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
5. next steps and scheduling of future hearings. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. These matters pertain to the Kalkaji Mandir, which this Court has been hearing from time to time. These are part-heard matters.

3. Pursuant to the previous order dated 25th April, 2022 the ld. Administrator has submitted Report No.6 dated 12th May, 2022 (hereinafter "Report No.6") and the ld. Administrator has also appeared and made submissions in respect of Report No.6. In so far as the status of the Dharamshalas and the Pujaris is concerned, the ld. Administrator has given certain recommendations in this regard.

4. Copies of this Report No.6 be released to the counsels appearing for the pujaris who were the petitioners before the Supreme Court in SLP No.9073/2022 titled Nathi Ram Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. and the Division Bench in LPA No.172/2022 titled Vinayak Bhardwaj v. Neeta Bhardwaj, and all other stakeholders.

5. Further, ld. Administrator has submitted that considering the large influx of devotees on a daily basis in the Kalkaji Mandir, which is in thousands usually, and in lakhs, during Navratras, in the redevelopment plan, proper waiting halls, arrangements for drinking, food courts and spaces ought to be made available for such devotees.

6. It is further submitted by the ld. Administrator that originally the impression was that the entire Kalkaji Mandir land was about 12 to 13 acres, however, after perusing the revenue records and the demarcation report, the area of the land seems to be to the tune of 17 to 18 acres and the same is also surrounded by a substantial part of DDA land. The said land has been marked in the site plan, revised as 19th September, 2012, which is being handed over to the Court today.

7. A copy of the said site plan in digital form may be given to Mr. Arun Birbal, ld. Standing Counsel for the DDA and SDMC, and to the other counsels for the parties, who shall make their submissions in this regard on the next date.

8. Going forward, the submission of Mr. Vikas Singh, ld. Senior Counsel and Mr. Rakesh Bhardwaj, ld. Counsel, appearing for the pujaris who were the petitioners before the Supreme Court in SLP No.9073/2022 titled Nathi Ram Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. and the Division Bench in LPA No.172/2022 titled Vinayak Bhardwaj v. Neeta Bhardwaj, and of various baaridars and pujaris is that they support the redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir fully, however, in the redevelopment process, the baaridars and the pujaris ought to be allowed to participate and give their suggestions and recommendations to the ld. Administrator and the Architect. Their submission is that the role of the Pujaris and the Dharamshala occupants ought to be acknowledged and some part of the redevelopment ought to account for their interests as well.

9. In view of the submissions made by the Dharamshala occupants and the pujaris today, they are permitted to appear before the ld. Administrator at a suitable time and date fixed by the ld. Administrator in order to enable them to give their suggestions/recommendations/proposals to the ld. Administrator in respect of the redevelopment. During this meeting, it is made clear that the concerns of the ld. Administrator regarding the waiting rooms for devotees and proper arrangements of food and water, shall be kept in mind while discussing the redevelopment with pujaris and dharamshala occupants. The ld. Architect shall be present in such meetings.

10. In so far as the erection of boundary wall and redevelopment is concerned, the ld. Architect has submitted a Status Report pertaining to the con

Click Here to Read the rest of this document