Puttur, 30 September 2026: Puttur MLA Ashok Kumar Rai has hit back at the BJP over its September 29 protest concerning the administration and development activities of Sri Mahalingeshwara Temple, alleging that some of those who participated in the protest had themselves occupied temple land.
Speaking at a Bagar Hukum Sakram meeting and title-deed distribution programme held at the Bajathur Gram Panchayat Hall on September 29, Rai said questions were being raised about alleged irregularities at the temple by people who, according to him, had not contributed to its development.
“Those who occupied temple land and those who did not contribute even one rupee towards the temple have come together to protest. What should one say about such people? What kind of times have we come to?” Rai said.
His remarks came hours after BJP leaders staged a protest in Puttur seeking an independent investigation into the temple's administration, finances, development works, properties, tender procedures and objections reportedly raised in the 2024–25 audit report.
'₹60 crore development work is under way'
Rai said development works worth around ₹60 crore were being undertaken at the Mahalingeshwara Temple. He said he had allocated ₹10 crore from his MLA fund for temple-related development and claimed that he had secured an additional ₹5 crore from the Chief Minister during the Cabinet meeting held in Mangaluru. Rai also said he was personally donating ₹1 crore from his earnings to the temple.
He added that he had initially announced a donation of 50 grams of gold and subsequently donated 100 grams of gold to the temple. “If I had intended to commit any irregularity there, would I have needed to put so much money from my own pocket? I could have simply kept the money inside,” Rai said.
'We secured 18 acres for the temple'
Rai also claimed that 18 acres of land belonging to the Mahalingeshwara Temple had been secured for the temple. He questioned why the issue had not been resolved during earlier administrations.
“Why did this not happen earlier? Why did they not have the courage to do it? Did Ashok Rai have to come for all this?” he asked.
Rai said he had initially decided not to react strongly to the criticism but warned that he would continue efforts to recover temple land wherever it had allegedly been occupied. “I will not leave this issue. Wherever temple land has been occupied, we will work to get it back,” he said.
Strong criticism of protesters
Rai strongly criticised those whom he alleged had occupied temple property and later participated in the protest seeking to “save” the temple. He alleged that some people had constructed houses on temple land and rented them out for years, thereby benefiting financially from the property.
Describing such protesters in strong terms, Rai said genuine devotees of Mahalingeshwara would not associate themselves with what he called a politically motivated protest. He also appealed to people not to support such protests without examining the facts.
“There is no question of being afraid because of a protest. Those who have occupied temple land will not be spared,” Rai said.
Background to the dispute
The remarks come amid an escalating political dispute over the administration and development of Sri Mahalingeshwara Temple.
On September 29, BJP leaders and former office-bearers held a protest at Kille Maidan and demanded an independent investigation into the temple management committee, development committee, financial transactions, properties, demolition of structures, tender procedures and the 2024–25 audit observations.
The BJP also submitted a memorandum through the Puttur Assistant Commissioner to the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Department, seeking a special audit, physical verification of temple properties and jewellery, scrutiny of development-related documents and action if irregularities are established.
Rai's latest comments represent his response to those allegations. The claims made by both sides remain subject to verification through official records and the findings of the competent authorities.