A Miscellaneous Application has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking modification of its earlier order that permitted the Uttar Pradesh Government to use funds from the Shri Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan for acquiring five acres of land around the temple as part of a redevelopment corridor project.

The plea was mentioned before a bench headed by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih by Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, representing the applicant Devendra Nath Goswami, who claims to be managing temple affairs and belongs to the Raj Bhog branch of Shebaits. Goswami asserts he is a lineal descendant of Swami Sri Hari Das Ji Goswami, the temple’s original founder, and that his family has managed the temple for over 500 years in accordance with ancient customs and traditions.

The applicant contends that the May 15, 2025, judgment—delivered without notice to him or other hereditary managers—was passed ex parte, even though the question of temple management and fund administration is pending before the Allahabad High Court.

"This is an MA where a judgment is passed on the application of the State of UP without making us a party. In the same judgment, the Court has directed taking away the funds of the temple... the State is taking the funds of the temple," Tiwari submitted.

CJI Gavai agreed to list the matter for hearing next week.

Background of the May 15 Order

The order in question was passed by a bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal in SLP (Civil) No. 29702 of 2024. The court allowed the use of the temple’s fixed deposits for land acquisition, modifying an earlier direction of the Allahabad High Court, which had barred such usage. The Supreme Court considered the State’s ₹500 crore development plan for the corridor before allowing this modification.

The applicant claims the Supreme Court’s decision was rendered in a Special Leave Petition concerning an unrelated matter—namely, the appointment of a Receiver for Giriraj Temple in Govardhan, Mathura. The redevelopment plan for Banke Bihari Temple was introduced via an intervention application filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, which the applicant argues lacked jurisdictional basis and procedural propriety.

The application states:

“There was no occasion or jurisdictional basis for the State of Uttar Pradesh to file an intervention application seeking sweeping reliefs in respect of a matter pending before the Hon’ble High Court… especially when substantial arguments in that matter had already been concluded.”

It further alleges that introducing the redevelopment proposal via an intervention application in an unrelated case constitutes a “clear abuse of the process of law,” undermining the rights of hereditary temple managers and breaching the hierarchical structure of the judiciary.

The applicant seeks the following:

1. Modification of the Supreme Court’s May 15, 2025 judgment, specifically Paragraphs 19, 20, and 24, to:

   • Set aside the approval granted to the State’s redevelopment scheme.

   • Revoke the permission allowing the use of temple funds for land acquisition.

2. Interim stay on the implementation of the redevelopment scheme, including any acquisition, demolition, or construction, pending final disposal of the application.

3. Constitution of a heritage and stakeholder consultation committee to ensure inclusive and transparent consideration of any proposed redevelopment.

4. Any other relief deemed appropriate to protect the religious and cultural heritage of the Banke Bihari Temple.

Case Title: Ishwar Chanda Sharma v. Devendra Kumar Sharma & Ors.