Lord Hanuman has been declared a "defaulter" for non-payment of property tax in Bihar.
Bhojpur district authorities have issued notices to lord Hanuman for his failure to pay property tax to the tune of Rs 4.33 lakh, warning the defaulter of punitive action against him.
Ara Municipal Corporation officials said Hanuman had three holdings (property) in the form of temples in Ara, the district headquarters town of Bhojpur, around 60km west of Patna. The owner of the property (read Hanuman) was earlier asked to clear holding tax dues twice but in vain.
"We decided to serve notices after the property owner failed to adhere to the previous order," Ara Municipal Corporation commissioner Pramod Kumar told The Telegraph. "We cannot sue the members of the temple committee as their name did not figure in our official records."
According to official records, all the holdings in Mathia locality, which comes under ward 37 of the town belongs to Hanuman. Payment of Rs 3.17 lakh is pending against the holding number 587, Rs 94,000 is pending against holding number 607 and Rs 22,000 against holding number 624.
This is not the first time that notices have been issued against Hindu deities in the state. A lower court in Rohtas district issued summons to Lord Hanuman in February to appear in court in connection with a roadside temple dedicated to him. The sub-divisional magistrate in Rohtas asked the god to appear in his court after taking into stock complaints of encroachment filed by the state public works department.
Earlier, an official in Begusarai had issued an encroachment notice against "Bajrang Bali" in connection with a roadside temple in Lohia Nagar area of the town that had led to delay in completion of a rail-cum-road bridge.
Bajrang Dal workers had protested against the notice and forced the authorities to annul it. OnFebruary 1, a lawyer in Sitamarhi district lodged a complaint against Lord Ram and Laxman for ill-treatment of Ram's pregnant wife Sita. Sitamarhi chief judicial magistrate Rash Bihari later rejected the case as "not maintainable" and "beyond logic and facts" because the petition sought a case against the deities for banishing Sita into exile "without proper justification".
