The Supreme Court established guidelines for the proper management and regulation of religious properties, emphasizing public interest and accountability of involved parties.

1. Mr. R.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for Respondent 3 may produce sufficient material to show that the land initially had not been endowed to the deity rather it had been given to the pujaris who claim to inherit the said property and manage the same.

2. In Vol. II of the paper book at p. 157, there is a document which shows that the Municipal Corporation had allotted the piece of land measuring 7' x 5' PCO to one Mr. Manish Jain, from handicapped quota, near Fire Brigade Office. Therefore, Mr Sanjib Sen, learned counsel appearing for Respondent 7 Municipal Corporation of Delhi may explain under what authority of law, such an allotment had been made and how many such allotments have been made by the Corporation.

3. Mr. R. K. Khanna, learned ASG along with Mr. D.S. Mahra, Advocate appearing for Respondents 8 and 9 is directed to take notice on behalf of Respondents 2 and 4 and he assures us that some responsible officer of Respondents 2 and 4 shall file an affidavit at the earliest making everything clear regarding the ownership, title, entitlement of the land inside the Temple and around the Temple, its area and who was the donor of the land and whether it was given to the deity or pujaris and in case it had been given to the deity, under what circumstances, the administration had remained a silent spectator when so much encroachment had been made illegally on the land and under what circumstances the pujaris, etc. are accepting the rent from the tenants, if any.

4. In spite of service on Respondent 6 DDA, none appears. Ms. Binu Tamta, Advocate is directed to take instructions and file its reply by next date.

5. List the matters on 18-11-2013 at 2.00 p.m. Interim order granted on 12-10-2013 shall continue till then.
Order dated 18-11-2013

6. IA No. 2 of 2013 filed by Mr. Arun K. Sinha, learned counsel is allowed. He is impleaded as an intervenor. Additional documents filed by him are taken on record.

7. Heard Mr. Brijender Chahar, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. Vinay Garg, learned counsel appearing for the applicants in IA No. 4 of 2013. Application for impleadment (IA No. 4 of 2013) is allowed and the applicants are impleaded as the respondents.

8. Application for impleadment filed by Sarvesh Bhardwaj, applicant - in - person is allowed and he is impleaded as intervenor.

9. The learned counsel for the parties may give the photocopies of the title deeds which are in their possession or the copies of the judgment given earlier either by the civil or the Revenue Courts to Mr. D.S. Mahra, learned counsel assisting Mr Rakesh K. Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the Union of India within a period of three weeks. Shri Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General may examine the documents / translations, etc. and seek assistance from the Revenue Officers and prepare the short notes and the learned SDM, South District, New Delhi, who would be free from the election duty by then may examine the documents and prepare a proper reply mainly throwing light regarding the title of the land in dispute or part thereof.

10. List this case on the second Monday of January 2014.
Order dated 13-1-2014

11. List the matters after eight weeks. In the meanwhile, Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General suggests that he will take further instructions as the State Government is willing to come out with a particular legislation.
Order dated 18-7-2014
(Before Dipak Misra and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ.)

12. All applications for impleadment, that are listed today, are allowed. This Court on 21-10-20131 had passed the following order:
"1. Mr R.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for Respondent 3 may produce sufficient material to show that the land initially had not been endowed to the d