An Open Letter to Mumbai hotelier Gurinder Singh Bawa should have been enough for DGPC Baramulla President Paramjit Singh and his co-members of the DGPC Baramulla, to retract his dangerous move to obtain large funds, keep the Sangat in the dark until the matter became public knowledge, and to change the name of the historic Gurdwara Bhai Vir Singh Ji, Gulmarg. It would have been appropriate had he unequivocally and humbly accepted his misadventure.

Unfortunately, he tendered a lame-duck apology with too many “ifs” and is attempting to hide behind the façade of an unlawful and unnecessary SGPC permission. World Sikh News Editor Jagmohan Singh, who has been closely following the developments, writes this Open Letter to Paramjit Singh, expressing the angst of Sikhs in general and Kashmir Sikhs in particular, and asks him to come clean on the issue.

Dear Sardar Paramjit Singh Ji,

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

Honestly, I thought my outcry to your mentor, Gurinder Singh Bawa, would deter you and your team, comprising Vice President Sewa Singh, Secretary Satinder Singh, Joint Secretary Rajinder Singh Tulla, Treasurer Paramjeet Singh, Chairman Onkar Singh, Members Dr Balwinder Singh, Popinder Singh and Nirmal Singh, from acting against the wishes of the Sikh Sangat. It is a saving grace that two members Rajinder Singh and Manmeet Singh are resisting the pressure mounted by you. However, like most Presidents of our Gurdwaras and Committees, despite overwhelming criticism and refrain, you and your team are pachydermous in your response and reaction.

Recently, the controversy has further deepened. As it stands today, the issue before the Sikh Sangat is no longer merely a construction project. It is no longer merely a donation. It is no longer even a question of the proposed name change. More significantly, you have lost the trust of the Sangat, notwithstanding any public display you may make of associates and supporters.

You were elected to lead. You were elected to unite the Sangat, safeguard Sikh institutions and preserve public confidence. Yet over the past several weeks, many Sikhs have been left asking whether those responsibilities have been discharged with the openness and care that the office demands.

The questions that continue to circulate are neither complicated nor unreasonable. I wonder why it should be so difficult to provide the details to the Sikh Sangat. For the last few weeks, the Kashmir Sangat has remained in the dark: How much money was received? Into which account was it deposited? Was it accepted through a properly authorised resolution? Were all members of the DGPC informed? Were any understandings or commitments attached to the donation? Why did publicity material appear referring to Gurdwara Bhai Vir Singh Ji by a different name? Who authorised discussions concerning such a change?

Why, when and by whom was the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee approached? Under what authority was it approached? Under what authority has the SGPC given permission? What role is the SGPC expected to play in the affairs of a Gurdwara governed under the Jammu & Kashmir Sikh Gurdwaras and Religious Endowment Act, 1973?

At most, the SGPC can offer advice; it cannot issue any binding direction in this matter, even if the initiative comes from its nominee Gurinder Singh Bawa from Mumbai. As the matter has reached the Jathedar Akal Takht Sahib, the SGPC, your team and you will have to account for this also.

Sardar Saheb Ji, please pause and reflect. A leadership secure in its actions does not fear questions; it answers them. A leadership confident of public support does not rely upon caveats, oblique threats or attempts to discourage scrutiny. It places facts before the Sangat and allows the truth to speak for itself.

What makes this particularly unfortunate is the institution at the centre of the controversy. Gurdwara Bhai Vir Singh Ji is not merely another building under the care of the DGPC Baramulla.  It occupies a special place in the memory of Sikhs. It is associated with Sikh savant Bhai Vir Singh Ji, one of the foremost architects of the Sikh renaissance, whose contribution to Sikh literature, scholarship and spiritual life remains immeasurable.

You should have upheld the dignity of this place as one of your flagship projects rather than attempting to change the name and environs of the place, and that too in the name of Guru Angad Dev Ji. The place needs the quietude that attracted Bhai Vir Singh Ji to it decades ago. It hurts many Sikhs that upon restoration, nothing meaningful appears to have been preserved to save the memory of the great Sikh savant.

The Sikh Sangat of Kashmir has demonstrated remarkable restraint throughout this episode. Despite strong feelings, it has largely confined itself to seeking answers and expressing concern. That restraint deserves respect rather than dismissal. While you still continue to overawe them, it is comforting that Rajinder Singh and Manmeet Singh have stood their ground against your illegal move.

In one of the videos, you stated that Gurinder Singh Bawa has now told you that if the Sangat does not want the project, it should be abandoned. You should listen to this sane advice, return the entire funds with gratitude, and when the Sikhs of Kashmir are ready with some worthwhile project, a transparent funding campaign can always be started.

If you believe that confidence in your leadership remains intact, there should be no hesitation in making a full disclosure of the facts. If, however, you find yourself unable to restore the trust of the Sangat and the confidence of your own Committee members, then you should seriously reflect upon whether you continue to possess the moral authority necessary to discharge the responsibilities of your office.

The Sikh Sangat awaits your response.

Sincerely,

Jagmohan Singh
Editor, World Sikh News

Note: The title photo is an AI-generated image of the historic Gurdwara Vir Singh, Gulmarg, which is nearing completion.