Ayodhya: The reported theft of offerings at the Ram temple appears to have widened differences between the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust and the Ram Mandir Construction Committee, with the growing distance now becoming visible in their formal meetings.
After the offering theft came to light on June 6, the absence of Construction Committee chairman Nripendra Misra from two consecutive Trust meetings and the absence of any Trust representative from the Construction Committee's meetings in July and from the three-day meeting held from August 19 to 21 have raised questions over the working relationship between the two bodies.
Earlier, former Trust general secretary Champat Rai, trustee Dr Anil Mishra and construction in-charge Gopal Rao were regular participants in Construction Committee meetings. However, after Rai and Anil Mishra left their respective positions, the Trust has not been represented in the committee's meetings.
The development assumes significance because Misra had publicly reacted strongly to the offering theft case. From June 18, he gave interviews to several television channels in Delhi and described the incident as "dacoity" rather than theft. Although he had initially maintained that his responsibility was confined to temple construction, he also spoke publicly on issues concerning offerings and temple management.
After June 23, however, Misra stopped making public statements on the matter. When the Trust held its meeting on July 6, he did not attend. A Construction Committee meeting held later in July was also not attended by any Trust office-bearer. The same situation prevailed during the committee's meeting from August 19 to 21.
Sources associated with the Trust said Misra had started distancing himself from temple management issues nearly six months ago and had increasingly restricted his focus to construction-related matters. According to the sources, earlier meetings involved detailed discussions on both construction and management issues, with efforts made to reach a consensus even when there were differences.
The sources claimed that Misra later began treating matters related to temple management as falling within the Trust's jurisdiction and gradually withdrew from such discussions. The widening separation is now being seen as an institutional strain between the Trust and the Construction Committee.
Speculation about differences intensified after a letter surfaced recently. Misra, however, dismissed the letter as fabricated and said he had never seen any such document. He alleged that attempts were being made to create an atmosphere of distrust. He also said the money for temple construction had been raised by the Trust and that no government funds had been used for the construction.
The continuing absence of representatives from each other's meetings has nevertheless raised questions about the relationship between the two bodies. If there is no major disagreement, why have representatives of the Trust and Construction Committee stopped attending each other's meetings? Is the development merely a result of the division of responsibilities, or has the offering theft case triggered a wider dispute over authority and accountability?
Attempts to contact Construction Committee chairman Nripendra Misra and Trust interim general secretary Krishna Mohan for their response were unsuccessful. Trust secretary Jagdish declined to comment, describing the matter as an internal issue of the Trust.
