Dilip Shivhare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

1 WP-5836-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
th
ON THE 27 OF OCTOBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 5836 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC030042092026
DILIP SHIVHARE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri D.P. Singh - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Dharmendra Nayak - Govt. Advocate for the State.
ORDER
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-
"i) That, the respondents be commanded to take
cognizance in respect of the Temple in question which is
declared as Mafi Temple situated nearby by to the Restaurant
of the petitioner namely 'Kings Restaurant', at Mudgal Payga,
Jagtap Ki Goth, Madhoganj, Lashkar, Gwalior and the
respondents be further commanded to hold an enquiry over
the complaint of the petitioner with a further to hold an
enquiry for verifying the status of the Temple in question
with a further to pass an appropriate order regarding status of
the Temple in question, in the interest of justice.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM

2 WP-5836-2026
ii) That, the respondents be further commanded that if

no order of declaring the temple as 'Mafi Temple' situated in
Jagtap Ki Goth, Madhoganj, Lashkar, Gwalior, the
respondents will not create any obstruction in future for
entertaining an application for issuance of FL-2 License
declaring as prohibited area, in the interest of justice.
iii) That, the respondents be further commanded that
once the area where the petitioner is running his restaurant,
the FL-2 License be issued to the petitioner in accordance
with law, in the interest of justice.
iv) Cost of the petition be awarded or any other order
or direction deemed fit in the circumstances of the case be
issued in the favour of the petitioner."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the temple referred to
by the respondents in support of their action is not the same temple which the
petitioner has pointed out. It is contended that the respondents have relied
upon the entry relating to Shri Radhakrishan Mahadev Temple, recorded in
the Mafi Aukaf Register, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure R/2,
whereas the temple pointed out by the petitioner is claimed to be a different
temple, referred to as Radha Krishna Temple. According to learned counsel,
unless the identity of the two temples and their respective distances from the
restaurant are properly verified, the action taken by the respondents cannot
be conclusively sustained on the basis of the aforesaid register entry.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate submits that, as per the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM

3 WP-5836-2026
official records and the spot inspection/Panchnama dated 30.01.2026, a

temple situated at a distance of approximately 30 metres from the restaurant
is Shri Radhakrishan Mahadev Temple, which finds mention in the Maufi
Aukaf Register (Annexure R/2). It is submitted that the respondents have
proceeded on the basis of the official record and the findings recorded during
the spot inspection.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
The principal issue requiring consideration is whether the temple
alleged to be situated at a distance of approximately 30 metres from Kings
Restaurant is, in fact, the Shri Radhakrishan Temple recorded in the Maufi
Aukaf Register, as relied upon by the respondents, or whether it is a different
temple, namely, the Radha Krishna Mahadev Temple, to which the petitioner
refers. The identity of the temple and the actual distance of each of the
aforesaid temples from the restaurant are material aspects which require
verification by the competent authority on the basis of the relevant official
records and a proper spot inspection.
In the considered opinion of this Court, before any final conclusion is
drawn regarding the validity of the action taken by the respondents, it would
be appropriate to direct the competent authority to undertake a fresh and
comprehensive exercise for identification of the aforesaid temples and
ascertainment of their respective distances from the restaurant. Such exercise
shall not be confined merely to the description or entry appearing in the Mafi
Aukaf Register, but shall also take into account the actual location, identity
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM

4 WP-5836-2026
and other relevant particulars of the temples as found on the spot and

reflected in the official records.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
controversy, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The competent authority shall first identify and verify the temple
referred to by the petitioner as Radha Krishna Mahadev Temple and the
temple recorded as Shri Radhakrishan Temple in the Maufi Aukaf Register,
as reflected in Annexure R/2, and determine whether the two descriptions
refer to one and the same temple or to two distinct temples.
(ii) For the aforesaid purpose, the competent authority shall examine
the relevant Mafi Aukaf Register, Annexure R/2, the spot
inspection/Panchnama dated 30.01.2026, available maps, records of the
concerned department and such other relevant documents as may be
necessary. A proper spot inspection shall also be conducted, wherever
required, to ascertain the precise location and identity of each temple.
(iii) The competent authority shall specifically ascertain and record the
actual distance between Radha Krishna Mahadev Temple and Kings
Restaurant, as well as between Shri Radhakrishan Temple, recorded in the
Mafi Aukaf Register, and Kings Restaurant. The manner of measurement
and the relevant particulars relied upon for determining the distances shall be
duly recorded in the proceedings.
(iv) The petitioner as well as the concerned respondents shall be
afforded a reasonable opportunity to participate in the aforesaid proceedings,
submit their respective claims and objections, and produce relevant
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM

5 WP-5836-2026
documents and other material in support thereof. The competent authority

shall consider the material produced by the parties and pass a reasoned and
speaking order recording its findings regarding the identity of the temple or
temples and their respective distances from the restaurant.
(v) If, upon such verification, it is found that the temple alleged to be
situated at a distance of approximately 30 metres from the restaurant is
indeed the same Shri Radhakrishan Temple recorded in the Mafi Aukaf
Register, the action taken by the respondents on that basis shall be
considered in accordance with the applicable provisions of law and the
relevant rules.
(vi) Conversely, if it is found that the temple referred to by the
petitioner as Radha Krishna Mahadev Temple is distinct from Shri
Radhakrishan Temple recorded in the Mafi Aukaf Register, the respondents
shall reconsider the action already taken in the light of the aforesaid findings
and take consequential action, as warranted, in accordance with law.
(vii) The entire exercise, including verification, measurement of
distances, consideration of the submissions of the parties and passing of the
reasoned order, shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
actual identity or legal status of the temples, the applicability of the
prescribed distance restrictions, or the petitioner's entitlement to the FL-2
licence. All such issues shall be considered by the competent authority in
accordance with law, in the light of the findings recorded pursuant to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM

6 WP-5836-2026
aforesaid exercise.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
pwn*

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN KUMAR
Signing time: 10/28/2026
11:42:52 AM