23 Pally Durga Mandir on Harish Mukherjee Road. Picture by Sanjoy Chattopadhyaya

The 23 Pally Durga Mandir on Harish Mukherjee Road, a popular place of worship among devotees in south Calcutta, is currently mired in power politics. The dissolution of a trustee board that ran the day-to-day affairs of the temple and its replacement by a newly formed society has driven a wedge between the temple’s administrators and office bearers, both current and past.

The members of the erstwhile 23 Pally Durga Mandir Trustee Board allege that the new executive committee of the 23 Pally Durga Mandir Society has vested interests and wants to demolish the present temple and build a multi-storeyed building with the mandir occupying the ground floor.

“An influential member of the new committee is a realtor. We hear they may demolish the existing structure and create a highrise. The mandir will be on the ground floor,” said Sandip Mitra, a member of the erstwhile trustee board.

Prabir Dasgupta, the working president of the present committee, against whom the allegations are levelled, denies any such mandir makeover plans. “There is no owner deed or dalil of the mandir. Is it ever possible for anyone to construct a building without possessing the owner’s deed?” he demanded.

The local residents and devotees fear a political twist in the temple tale. “Mamata Banerjee’s brother, Kartick Banerjee, is backing the supporters of the society. On the other hand, an anonymous letter was published in Ganashakti, the CPM’s mouthpiece, on October 12 expressing views in favour of the trustee board,” said a local resident.

Kartick Banerjee, when contacted, said: “I am not a member of the committee and I don’t support any of the warring groups.” However, he stressed that it was always better to have a registered body to govern the temple.

The fear of demolition looms large. A clause [12(d)] included in the Regulations of 23 Pally Durga Mandir Society states that the executive committee of the society will have the authority to “sell, lease, mortgage or otherwise dispose of and deal with all or any part of the property of the society as deemed necessary or expedite for the use of the society”.

The problem started with the dissolution of the unregistered trustee board that was replaced by the 23 Pally Durga Mandir Society in June 2007. The new society was registered under The West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. “Everything was fine till 2006. There was no problem with the working of the trustee board. Around June 2007, we came to know that the trustee board has been replaced by a society that will be in charge of conducting the affairs of the temple. We were completely in the dark about the entire thing. There were 16 trustee board members. Out of them nine signed in favour of the formation of the society,” said Mitra.

“For such an important decision, there should have been a meeting where all the general members should have been informed about the changes,” he added.

The society’s argument? “Is it wrong to have a registered body running a temple?” asked Dasgupta.

One of the members, Amiya Roy Chowdhury, who was the secretary of the trustee board but signed in favour of the formation of the society, later wrote a letter in September to the registrar of societies for the dissolution of the society. Roy Chowdhury was also appointed general secretary of the society after its formation. “I was given wrong information. I was ailing at the time the society was formed,” said Chowdhury. However, apprehending a change in Chowdhury’s stance, the society wrote a letter stating that he had been removed from the position of general secretary in a meeting held on September 16, 2007. Mitra alleges that the meeting never took place.

Later Chowdhury filed a case title suit 1707 of 2007 in the court of the civil judge (junior division), fourth court, at Alipore challenging the validity of the meeting. The verdict of the case and the appeal to the registrar are still pending. “The temple was built in the mid-1980s. Nothing like this has ever happened before. I feel ashamed that people are talking about 23 Pally for all the wrong reasons now,” said Ashis Mitter, a local resident.

There have been efforts to find a solution between the two warring groups. A meeting was held in July 2008 at actor-director Kaushik Sen’s house next to the temple. Mamata Banerjee, the local MP, was present at the meeting along with representatives from the two camps. Kaushik Sen was asked to mediate. He started but then stopped. “I was asked to find a solution. My task was to form a single committee with representatives from both camps. I had arranged two meetings but in none of them did the two groups agree to sit together for talks. After sometime I found that both sides were inflexible and the matter was very complicated. So I decided to withdraw,” said Sen.

The most famous face of the 23 Pally para is saddened by the impact the controversy had on the people. “To me, the para atmosphere is more important than the power struggle inside 23 Pally. Unfortunately, the problems of the temple have affected the residents here. That was palpable during Puja; there was a sense of apprehension,” said Sen.

Subhajoy Roy