Residents, however, strongly objected. They asserted that the temple is not an unauthorized structure but was constructed by the JDA itself years ago along with the adjoining park. Even the boundary wall, they claimed, was built by the authority’s own agency. Calling the same structure an encroachment now, they argued, was “completely unjustified” and “insensitive.”

Local residents said that issuing such a notice to a religious site hurts public sentiments and that the administration should act with greater caution and empathy.

As protests intensified in the area, the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) intervened, reviewing preliminary facts and ordering the suspension of the enforcement officer, holding him accountable for the controversy.

In its statement, the CMO said the officer’s conduct reflected “serious and deliberate negligence” in government work and showed a clear “departure from expected administrative behavior,” indicating arbitrariness.

Meanwhile, officials in JDA’s enforcement wing maintained that the action was part of compliance with High Court directions arising from a pending petition. The Deputy Commissioner of Zone 7, tasked with surveying structures along Gandhi Path for the widening project, reportedly found that the temple’s boundary wall intruded into the proposed road width and listed it as encroachment.

The incident has triggered sharp public reactions, raising questions about administrative discretion, sensitivity toward religious structures, and accountability within government agencies.