Karnataka High Court orders status quo on process of widening national highway near Kollur Mookambika temple

February 21, 2024 10:23 pm | Updated February 22, 2024 11:34 am IST - Bengaluru

A file photo of Sri Mookambika Temple at Kollur.

A file photo of Sri Mookambika Temple at Kollur. | Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

The High Court of Karnataka on Wednesday ordered maintenance of status quo on the nature of acquisition land and other activities initiated for widening National Highway 66 near the Sri Mookambika temple, Kollur in Byndoor taluk of Udupi district.

A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda, passed the order on a PIL petition filed by Guruprasad, a devotee.

The petitioner has specifically questioned the notification issued on October 10, 2023, by the Assistant Commissioner, Kundapur taluk on behalf of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways for acquiring various land, which include a land at survey number 12 around the temple.

Pointing out that the temple has a history of over 1,200 years and hence it is deemed to be protected ancient temple as per the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, the petitioner said that construction of NH in close proximity of the temple not only posed danger to the structures of the temple but also severely impacted activities of the temple.

It has been pointed out in the petition the land at survey number 12, notified for acquisition, is used for various activities of the temple, including car festival and annual feasts, and acquisition of this land would result in hampering the age-old traditions and rituals being conducted in the temple using this land.

“Constructing a national highway in close proximity to the ancient temple raises valid concerns about potential damage, both physical and spiritual,” the petitioner has contended.

The petitioner has complained that he and several other devotees had submitted objection for acquisition of this land but the authorities have proceeded further without considering the objection though it was mandatory to give opportunity of hearing as per Section 3C of the National Highways Authority Act, 1956.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.