> Which part do you find ‘not reputable’ source of facts?

The complete lack of any supporting links, and the general vagueness of the claims; "potential misuse", "potential mismanagement", "sparked a debate" are not particularly strong claims.

Where's the reputable source for "infiltrated by anti Hindu interests" or "drilling and building within temple stone walls that are hundreds of years old and installing ceilings fans and lights"? Why is Modi's Hindu nationalist BJP permitting such a thing?