The Delhi High Court, in its decision on Wednesday, noted that Lord Shiva does not require our protection, as it approved the demolition of the Shiva Temple situated on the Yamuna floodplain.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that it is "we, the people" who seek Lord Shiva's protection and blessings. He further stated that Lord Shiva would be happier if the Yamuna riverbed and floodplain were cleared of encroachments and illegal constructions.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma of the Delhi High Court remarked that the petitioner's counsel's suggestion to include Lord Shiva as a party in the case was a desperate attempt to misdirect the issue for the vested interests of its members. He emphasized that "Lord Shiva does not need our protection; rather, we, the people, seek his protection and blessings." The bench further stated, "There could be no iota of doubt that Lord Shiva would be happier if the Yamuna riverbed and the floodplain areas are cleared of all encroachments and unauthorized constructions."

Justice Dharmesh Sharma further observed that the daily prayers and special events held at the temple on festive occasions do not elevate the temple to a place of public significance.

The Court made these remarks while dismissing a plea filed by the Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti. The plea challenged the demolition order issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for the removal of the Pracheen Shiva Mandir (Ancient Shiva Temple) located near Taj Enclave in Geeta Colony.

After considering the case, the Court noted that there was no document to demonstrate that the temple was dedicated to the public rather than being a private temple managed by the petitioner society.

“In view of the foregoing discussion, the present writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner society is given 15 days time to remove the idols and other religious objects in the temple and to place the same in some other temple. If they fail to do so, the respondent DDA is directed to ensure that the idols are placed in some other temple, or as may be directed by the Religious Committee if they are approached for any suggestions,” the Court stated.

The Court further stated that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) shall be at liberty to demolish the unauthorized construction, and the petitioner society and its members shall not cause any impediment or obstacles in the demolition process.

Advocates Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Renu, Shivani Verma and Dipak Raj Singh appeared for the petitioner.

DDA was represented through its Additional Standing Counsel Arjun Pant and advocate Latika Malhotra.

Delhi government was represented through its Additional Standing Counsel (Civil) Mehal Nakra along with advocates Devansh Solanki and Aditi Kapoor.

Case Title: Pracheen Shiv Mandir Avam Akhada Samiti v Delhi Development Authority and Ors