SUBRAMANIAM SWAMY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioner-in-person, Dr. Saraf, learned Advocate General representing the State of Maharashtra, Shri. Surana, learned counsel for the applicant/intervener in Interim Application (L) No. 11666 of 2023 and Shri. Bheemacharya Balacharya Varakhedakar, who has moved the Interim Application (L) No. 17754 of 2023 on behalf of Vaidic Dharma Samrakshak Sangh (hereinafter referred to as "the Sangh").

(2.) As far as the prayer made by Shree Vitthal Rukmini Temples Committee is concerned, we permit the said Committee to make its submissions for the reasons that it is a statutory committee formed under the impugned enactment. Accordingly, Interim Application (L) No. 11666 of 2023 stands disposed of.

(3.) Having heard Shri Bheemacharya Balacharya Varakhedakar in support of Interim Application (L) No. 17754 of 2023, we find that the Sangh does not have any locus to intervene in the PIL petition for the reason that under challenge in the PIL petition is the statutory validity of State Legislation and merely because the members of the said Sangh are devotees of God Shree Vitthal, Rukminee and their other Pariwar Devatas, it cannot be said that they are either necessary or proper parties. Prayer is, thus, rejected. Interim Application (L) No. 17754 of 2023 stands disposed of accordingly.