Rajasthan High Court: In a review petition filed by the Nathdwara Temple Board against an earlier order dated 03-10-2017, seeking a modification of Direction Nos. 8 and 10 of the previous order, concerning the setting-up of a Trauma Centre and a National Level Institution for Art and Culture at Nathdwara, the Division Bench of Vinit Kumar Mathur and Anuroop Singhi, JJ., held that the primary responsibility for the development of these establishments rests with the State Government/State functionaries. The Court clarified that the Temple Board is under a bounden duty to provide all necessary assistance, including financial assistance, given its major role. Accordingly, the Court modified the original directions to reflect the division of responsibility.
Background
The present matter arose from review petition filed by the Nathdwara Temple Board and Goswami Shri Rakesh Ji Maharaj. The petitioners sought a modification of Direction Nos. 8 and 10, which were issued by the Court in an order dated 03-10-2017. These directions primarily pertained to the setting-up of a Trauma Centre and a National Level Institution at Nathdwara by the State Government/State functionaries. The petitioners submitted that, while the Nathdwara Temple Board was already giving assistance and aid, it could not be saddled with the responsibility of setting-up the Trauma Centre & National Level Institution.
Analysis and Decision
The Court observed that Direction Nos. 8 and 10 were primarily concerned with the setting-up of a Trauma Centre and the establishment of a National Level Institution for promoting Art and Culture.
In the considered opinion of the Court, these two establishments are required to be developed by the State Government/State functionaries. Since the Nathdwara Temple Board is having a major role to play in the matter, it shall also be the bounden duty of the Nathdwara Temple Board to provide all the assistance including financial assistance for establishment of those two centres.
The Court opined that the two centres cannot be developed by the Nathdwara Temple Board on its own and they can only help the State Government/State functionaries for setting up of these two centres of the national level.
The Court ordered that Direction Nos. 8 and 10 shall stand modified to the extent stated. The Court also ordered that the review petitioners shall have the liberty to argue all the points of which they are aggrieved at the time of the final hearing of the main writ petition. The Court disposed of the petition.
[Nathdwara Temple Board v. Dhirendra Manaharbhai Tharanariwala, D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 46/2018 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2858/2004, decided on 03-10-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioner(s): Vineet Dave, Kaushik Dave, Advocates
For Respondent(s): Sandeep Soni and Sukhdev Sharma for B. L. Bhati, AAG