The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed two petitions filed against the construction undertaken by the Odisha government at the Jagannath Temple in Puri, saying that the work was being done in public interest to benefit pilgrims, Live Law reported.

“Can state be denied to make necessary arrangements to provide basic facilities to devotees?” a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Hima Kohli asked, according to Bar and Bench. “The answer is an emphatic no.”

The Supreme Court was hearing the petitions against the Odisha High Court refusing to stop the state from undertaking construction work at the temple, according to Live Law.

The petitioners claimed that the Odisha government was carrying out illegal excavation and construction work. They added that the Naveen Patnaik-led Odisha government’s initiative poses a serious threat to the structure of the ancient site, according to PTI.

At Friday’s hearing, the Supreme Court said the even if the petitioners were concerned about damage to the temple, the High Court was already hearing the case.

“Inspite of that, the matter was mentioned for obtaining urgent orders before the [Supreme Cout] vacation bench on Monday,” it said. “Till the matter was not listed again a hue and cry was made as if heavens are going to fall if the matter is not heard.”

The court described the petitions as “publicity interest litigation”. It directed the petitioners to pay Rs 1 lakh each to the Odisha government within a month of the judgement, Bar and Bench reported.

“We highly deprecate the practice of filing such frivolous PIL [public interest litigation] as it is nothing but abuse of the process of the law,” the bench said. “They encroach upon valuable judicial time which could otherwise be utilised for considering genuine concerns. It is high time that such petitions are nipped in the bud so that development work is not stalled.”

In earlier hearings, Senior Advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani, appearing for the petitioners, had said that there was a complete embargo on construction in the area, PTI reported.

Pavani had also submitted that the government took permission for the construction from the National Monuments Authority instead of the director of archaeology at the Centre or state level.

However, Advocate General for Odisha Ashok Kumar Parija had argued that the competent body under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act was the National Monuments Authority, PTI reported.

He had also said that the state’s director of culture granted the permission and the plan aims to beautify the temple and provide amenities.

“Construction does not mean repair or remake [of] existing structures or clean the sewage, drains etc,” Parija added. “This is how it is understood and the DG ASI [director general of Archaeological Survey of India] also understands the same way.”

The state also submitted that over 60,000 devotees visit the temple daily and more toilets are needed.

“The amicus curiae in the case pointed out there was a necessity of more toilets and the court had issued directions in that regard,” he said, according to PTI.