RERA Cannot Treat Temple Deity and Registered Trust As Separate Entities: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld an order directing registration of a residential-cum-commercial project proposed by Shankar Ji Maharaj Trust after ruling that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) could not reject the application by treating the temple deity and the registered public trust managing the temple's affairs as separate entities.

A division bench of acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal upheld the Madhya Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal's order directing registration of the trust's 'Shree Shankar Ji Niwas' project at Patan in the Jabalpur district.

"The distinction drawn by the Authority between the Temple (deity) and the Trust is legally unsustainable. A temple deity, being a juristic person, remains a minor in the eyes of law and must act through a lawful management agency. A duly registered Public Trust is the legally recognized face of the deity. The revenue records showing the Temple's name are inherently represented by the registered Trust. Therefore, the Authority committed a grave jurisdictional error by overriding the Registrar's final orders," the court held.

The trust applied in June 2023 to register its residential-cum-commercial project on about 2.1 hectares of land at Patan in Jabalpur district.

Although the revenue records had long stood in the name of Shri Shankar Ji Maharaj Temple, the Registrar of Public Trusts had recorded the land as trust property in 1986 and, in 2021, permitted the trust to donate a part of it to the state government and develop the remaining land. Neither order was challenged before a civil court.

RERA first rejected the application in 2023 after holding that the Trust did not qualify as a "person" under the Act. When the High Court directed a fresh consideration, the Authority again refused registration, this time holding that the Trust had failed to establish clear and marketable title because the revenue records continued to stand in the temple's name.

The tribunal overturned that decision, holding that RERA could not disregard the Registrar's final findings and directing the Authority to register the project.

Before the High Court, RERA argued that it was required to verify title documents and that ownership disputes could only be decided by a competent civil court. The Trust maintained that the Registrar's findings had attained statutory finality and could not be ignored while considering its application.

Agreeing with the Trust, the High Court held that RERA may examine title documents but cannot decide title disputes or override a final determination made under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act.

It also held that the Supreme Court's decision in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti did not apply because that case concerned an unauthorised priest claiming ownership of government temple land, not a duly registered public trust administering temple property.

For Appellant (M.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority): Senior Advocate Ajay Gupta with Advocate Malvika Tiwari.

For Respondent (Shankar Ji Maharaj Trust): Senior Advocate Sanjay Agrawal with Advocate Arpit Agrawal.

For Respondent (State of Madhya Pradesh): Government Advocate Anubhav Jain.