Bhubaneswar: The court of the Member, Board of Revenue, has delivered a landmark judgment in connection with a dispute over Puri Jagannath temple land under Jatni Tahsil in Odisha’s Khurda district. 

In his judgement, Satyabrata Sahu, Member, Board of Revenue, directed the Jatni Tahasildar to correct the current Record of Rights (RoR) of the disputed land by recording it in the name of ‘Shri Jagannath Mahaprabhu Bije, Puri’, represented through the Shree Jagannath Temple Managing Committee.

The case pertains to a patch of land situated in Kudiyari Mouza under Jatni Tahasil in Khurda. The authorities of Puri Jagannath temple had contended that the long-term lease granted in 1951 for establishment of an industrial unit was not legally valid. Based on the said lease, the land was subsequently recorded in the current RoR in the names of private parties, including Nilamani Dubey and others as well as Gopabandhu Glass & Pottery Works Limited.

In its judgment, the court observed that under Section 58 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1939, as applicable at the relevant time, any lease of immovable property belonging to a religious institution for a period exceeding five years required the prior approval of the Commissioner of Endowments. However, in the present case, the opposite parties failed to produce any evidence establishing that such approval had been obtained. The Court further clarified that mere registration of a lease deed does not, by itself, confer legal validity upon the transaction.

The judgment also notes that the objective of the lease was to establish an industrial unit. However, the documents placed before the court did not establish that any such industrial unit had ever been set up or that the temple had derived any financial benefit from the lease. On the contrary, the latest field inspection report submitted by the Tahasildar indicates that the disputed land continues to remain vacant.

The Court further held that a Record of Rights (RoR) does not create or confer title; it merely constitutes prima facie evidence relating to possession. Where the very basis of an entry in the RoR is founded upon an illegal transaction, the revisional authority possesses full jurisdiction to correct such entries.

The judgment also refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Shri Jagannath Temple Managing Committee vs. Siddha Math, reiterating that the special statutory provisions enacted for the protection of temple properties must receive overriding importance and that no legal rights can arise in violation of such statutory safeguards.

Upon an elaborate consideration of the matter, the court concluded that the current RoR prepared in 1965 suffered from legal infirmities and could not be sustained. Accordingly, the revision petitions were allowed and the Tahasildar, Jatni, was directed to immediately correct the Record of Rights by recording the disputed land in the name of ‘ShriJagannath Mahaprabhu Bije, Puri’, represented through the Shri Jagannath Temple Managing Committee" under the classification "Anabadi–Puratana Patita" (Old Fallow Land).