The controversy surrounding the proposed renaming of Gurdwara Bhai Vir Singh in Gulmarg has escalated to the Akal Takht, with dissenting voices seeking intervention to preserve the shrine’s original identity.Two members of the District Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (DGPC), Baramulla — Rajinder Singh and Manmeet Singh —have formally approached the acting Jathedar of Akal Takht, Giani Kuldeep Singh Gargaj, urging him to intervene in the matter.Acting on their plea, Giani Gargaj has called up DGPC president Paramjeet Singh along with nine other members to the Akal Takht Secretariat on June 13 at 12 noon to clarify their position.The development comes amid conflicting claims over the status of the renaming proposal. DGPC president Paramjeet Singh maintained that the move had already been scrapped following objections from the ‘Sangat’.“After detailed discussions with the Sangat, it was unanimously decided that the gurdwara’s name would not be changed. Status quo will be maintained in view of the sentiments of the devotees. There was no ill intention. All proposals and announcements regarding the name change stand null and void,” he said.However, Rajinder Singh questioned the initial intent, asking why the proposal was announced without prior consultation with the Sangat. “If the intentions were clear, why was the name change announced without taking the Sangat into confidence? Why were flex boards bearing the changed name installed? The president must clarify this,” he said.He further raised concerns over the role of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), alleging that it overstepped its jurisdiction by issuing directions for the renaming. “The SGPC must explain under what authority it directed the DGPC to change the name,” he added.The dispute began after a proposal surfaced—and was reportedly announced publicly—to rename the gurdwara after the second Sikh Guru, Guru Angad Dev. The issue intensified when the SGPC directed the DGPC to implement the change, triggering widespread unease among local Sikh devotees, intellectuals and community leaders.Many in the local Sikh community and DGPC members strongly opposed the move, terming it insensitive and unjustified. Allegations also surfaced suggesting that the renaming was part of a larger design to transfer the gurdwara property to a trust for potential commercial interests, allegedly benefiting an SGPC member from Maharashtra, Gurinder Singh Bawa.Rejecting these claims, Bawa clarified that although he had been associated with a trust bearing the Guru’s name nearly two decades ago, it has remained defunct for years. “Neither I nor my family or associates are currently involved in managing any such trust,” he said, dismissing the allegations as “false and misleading.”On financial contributions, Bawa confirmed donating approximately Rs 50 lakh in two instalments directly to the DGPC for reconstruction work.The gurdwara, which suffered damage over three decades ago, is currently undergoing renovation with support from a Delhi-based ‘karsewa’ sect. Sources indicated that while the sect may not continue financial contributions, it has committed to providing labour support.Local representatives have alleged “extraneous motives” behind the SGPC’s directive, asserting that local sentiments were ignored in favour of external influence. They also questioned the legal validity of the directive, pointing out that the gurdwara does not fall under SGPC’s administrative jurisdiction.Instead, the shrine is governed by the Jammu and Kashmir Sikh Gurdwaras and Religious Endowment Act, 1973, which oversees the management and administration of Sikh religious institutions in the Union Territory.With the matter now before the Akal Takht, all eyes are on the June 13 meeting, which is expected to bring clarity and possibly a resolution to the ongoing dispute.