However, the court gave another opportunity for the same to the respondent state government through the Principal Secretary, Religious Endownment and others on the request of state counsel.
But while granting further time for reply, the HC made it clear that if the counter affidavit was not filed on or before the next date February 23, the matter shall be proceeded further while drawing necessary inference against the respondent.
A division bench of justice Dinesh Maheshwari and justice Anant Kumar passed the order on February 9 on a PIL filed by one Baburam Mishra raising the issue of the various requirements for Naimisharanya.
On December 7, 2015 the court had directed the respondent to file a counter affidavit.
The matter was thereafter taken up on January 25 and further time for filing counter affidavit was granted on the request of the state counsel.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
