Thermal energy and kinetic energy at macroscopic level

If it is not increasing the temperature, then why?

It does not.

The temperature of an object is due to the average kinetic energy associated with the random motion of the molecules about the center of mass of the object. It is a component of the internal energy of the material of the object (the other being the molecular potential energy). That random molecular motion with respect to its center of mass is not effected by velocity of the mass as a whole.

Look at it another way. Suppose you are sitting in a car with a cup of coffee at rest with respect to the road. Would you expect the temperature of the coffee to increase when the car starts moving?

By the way, if it did, it would violate the theory of special relativity. But that's another subject.

I know that kinetic energy is relative but when an object is made to move it needs to be given some amount of kinetic energy. Why does not this energy contribute in temperature change? I am not getting it at all.

As I explained in the first paragraph, the velocity of an object as a whole (an increase in its macroscopic kinetic energy) does not contribute to temperature change (an increase in its internal kinetic energy).

That said, one way in which the macroscopic kinetic energy of an object can contribute to a temperature change of the object is if the object undergoes an inelastic collision slowing the object. Internal friction associated withe the collision can convert some of the macroscopic kinetic into an increase in the internal energy of the object, and an increase in the temperature of its materials. But this is not the same thing as saying the velocity of an object increases its temperature.

Hope this helps.