Vindhyachal corridor: HC dismisses PIL against razing of small temples

PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad high court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking a stay on demolition of small temples within the campus of Maa Vindhyavasini Devi Temple, Vindhyachal, Mirzapur falling within the under-construction temple corridor.

The bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice AK Ojha on Monday (September 13) dismissed the PIL petition filed by one Arun Pathak of Mirzapur. The petition was filed seeking a direction to the state government and concerned authorities not to damage/demolish certain temples within the campus of Maa Vindhyavasini Devi Temple, Vindhyachal.

The court said the PIL petition filed earlier was also dismissed by the court on 30 March 2007 saying the PIL against the private temple was not maintainable. On this basis, the court dismissed the petition as not admissible.

State government counsel informed the court that in 2006 too, a PIL petition was filed seeking similar directions by which restraining demolition of small temples inside the temple campus and the PIL was dismissed on March 30, 2007 while observing that the temples on Maa Vindhyavasini Devi Temple premises were private temples and thereby public interest litigation would not be maintainable.

State counsel apprised the court about the previous order and the temple project and pleaded that the PIL petition was not maintainable. The petitioner’s plea was that all the small temples were being demolished under the temple project and that it should be stopped.

The court after hearing concerned parties dismissed the petition while observing, “We find that earlier a writ petition bearing No. 49433 of 2006 was dismissed by the judgment dated 30th March, 2007 holding the temple in the premises of Maa Vindhyawasini Devi Temple to be a private temple and thereby public interest litigation would not be maintainable.”

“In view of the above, we do not find reason to entertain the public interest litigation in regard to the affairs of the private temple,” said the bench.