The Delhi High Court recently ruled that Naga sadhus, as devotees of Lord Shiva, are expected to lead a life of total detachment from worldly matters, which renders their pursuit of property rights incompatible with their spiritual beliefs and practices.

The bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma held, “Naga sadhus are devotees of ‘Lord Shiva’ and they are ordained to live a life of complete detachment from the worldly affairs, and therefore, seeking property rights in their names does not conform with their beliefs and practices”. 

Represented by Advocate Kamlesh Kr. Mishra, Giri asserted that Mehant Shri Naga Baba Bhola Giri had possessed the property since 1996. The Khasra Girdawari documents indicated that the property, including the Shrine of Naga Baba Bhola Giri, was in the possession of his successor, Avinash Giri. Additionally, Giri argued that he had held possession of the property well before the 2006 deadline established by the Delhi Special Laws Act.

Represented by Additional Standing Counsel Udit Malik, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) asserted that the disputed property was within the Revenue Estate Bela, which is government land allocated to the Delhi Improvement Trust, the predecessor of the DDA, under the Nazul Agreement dated March 31, 1937.

The court observed that the relief sought by Giri in the petition had become moot, as their representation dated February 23, 2023, addressed to the District Magistrate (Central) for demarcation of the land in question under Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954, was rejected by the SDM, Sub-Division Kotwali, on April 19, 2023. The rejection was based on the fact that ‘all villages falling under Kotwali Sub Division have been urbanized/nazul land and the revenue records of the villages are not available with the office’, the court added.

“The petitioner has no right, title, or interest to continue to use and occupy the subject property”, the court noted.

The court noted that the individual in question was unequivocally a trespasser, and his three-decade-long tenure as a cultivator did not confer upon him any legal entitlement to persist in occupying the subject property. Furthermore, the court remarked that Giri seemed to have erected two rooms with a tin shed and other facilities alongside a shrine for the revered Baba, who passed away in 1996. Nevertheless, there was no evidence presented to suggest that the site held any historical significance or was designated for public worship or the offering of prayers to the deceased Baba.

The court observed that the Master Plan Delhi-2021 outlined strategies for the revitalization of the Yamuna River, encompassing initiatives such as maintaining sufficient water flow through releases from riparian states, upgrading trunk sewers, treating drains, extending sewerage to unserved areas, treating industrial effluents, recycling treated effluents, and reducing coliform levels at sewage treatment plants, alongside efforts to foster ecological equilibrium by planting trees. Given that the property in question was earmarked for the broader public interest, the petitioner could not assert any vested rights to persist in occupying and utilizing it.

Furthermore, the court noted that Naga sadhus, as devotees of Lord Shiva, are prescribed to lead lives of absolute detachment from worldly matters. Consequently, the pursuit of property rights contradicts their beliefs and practices.