JDA officer suspended after row over issuing notice to Lord Shiva temple in Jaipur

Jaipur, Nov 28 The controversy over the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) issuing a notice to a Lord Shiva temple in Vaishali Nagar of Rajasthan's Jaipur district has resulted in swift administrative action following which Enforcement Officer Arun Kumar Poonia has been suspended.

The suspension order was issued by JDA Secretary Nishant Jain, who said on Friday that Poonia will continue to receive allowances as per rules during the suspension period.

His headquarters has been fixed at the office of the Additional Director General of Police (Personnel) in Jaipur.

The incident occurred during a road-widening drive on Gandhi Path in Vaishali Nagar, where the JDA team pasted notices on several shops and residential properties, declaring them encroachments.

In the same process, a notice was pasted directly on the boundary wall of the Lord Shiva Temple, categorising it as "illegal construction".

The notice was not addressed to any individual, temple committee, or caretaker, but to the "Lord Shiva Temple" itself.

It instructed that a reply be submitted within seven days.

Once the notice came to public attention, local residents expressed strong resentment, saying that issuing such an order to a place of worship was insensitive and hurt religious sentiments.

Protests grew rapidly, prompting the Chief Minister's Office to take cognisance of the matter.

Based on initial findings, the enforcement officer was suspended on Friday for his role in the lapse.

Sources indicated that pasting a notice directly on a religious site without following the due administrative process is considered a serious violation.

The officer's action was viewed as deliberate negligence and an arbitrary exercise of authority, leading to disciplinary action.

The notice, issued by the enforcement branch of the JDA, referenced the High Court's order in Petition number 658/2024.

It mentioned that the PT survey report from the Deputy Commissioner of Zone 7 showed the temple's boundary wall encroaching 1.59 metres into the designated road area.

Based on this report, the boundary was deemed encroachment, and action was initiated.

The temple was asked to provide its response within seven days.

The matter remains under review as authorities continue to examine the procedural lapses involved.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor