Open Forum
New
Delhi, 28 November 2019
Govt Control of Temples
No End in Sight
By Dr.S.Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)
A
private member bill has been introduced in the Lok Sabha seeking freedom from Government
control for Hindu temples in the country. In the wake of several issues that
have arisen in recent times pertaining to temple administration, temple
property, rights of worshippers, and rights and privileges of deities, the fate
of this bill needs to be keenly watched though it is common knowledge that
private members’ bills are rarely discussed or adopted.
The
bill demands that the State shall not administer or manage any religious
institution or frame any law that allows it to control a religious institution,
and that all communities shall be allowed to maintain their religious
institutions. Pertinently, the bill
seeks to disallow diversion of temple income in the name of “secular purposes”
which in the opinion of supporters of the bill is “misappropriation”. Amendment of Article 26 of the Constitution to
prevent any Government from usurping any religious institution is also its purpose.
Two
major issues are involved in this move
- one relating to separation of State and Religion including religious institutions in a
secular State, and the other regarding equality in the religious rights of majority and minority communities. Only
Hindu religious institutions have fallen under tight Government control, and
not those of Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Jain, and other minority communities.
Several
attempts have been made over the years to free temples and other religious
places from the control of “secular” authorities. In 2014 came a categorical assertion from the
Supreme Court that no Government had the absolute right to take over the
management of temple trusts.
Temples
were brought under Government control during the British rule mainly in
southern India under the Madras Regulation VII of 1817. However, in 1840, a Directive of East India
Company returned the temples to trustees as Christian missionaries were averse
to managing Hindu temples. Under modified arrangements, the Board of Revenue
was vested with the task of supervising temple management. It helped to retain Government
control.
In
1863, the Religious Endowments Act handed over temple administration to
trustees appointed by the British Government. It covered mosques and all other religious
institutions.
In
1923, when the Justice Party and Non-Brahmin Movement were going strong, an Act of the Madras Legislative Council led
to the creation of Hindu Religious Endowments Board for “better governance and
management” of religious
institutions. The Board
established its authority and systematically brought many religious
institutions under its control and its power for “take over” of temples got
established by 1935. It led to a halt in
1939 when the Madras High Court ruled that the Board could not take over
temples on “frivolous grounds”.
Government
interference in the management of temples was not for proper religious
functions, but for management of their wealth and assets. After independence, temples that were under
the control of former principalities were transferred to the Government of
India and were passed to the administration of the Dewaswom Boards of concerned
States – a step inconsistent with the
concept of secular Government.
The
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act was adopted in 1951 to
“provincialise the administration of Hindu religious institutions”. It led to “nationalization” of thousands of temples
in many States. Already some very
ancient and important temples like Jagannath Puri, Tirumalai Tirupati, Kashi Vishwanath, Vaishnodevi, Shirdi , Guruvayur, Amarnath, Badrinath, and
Kedarnath temples were under Government
control.
In
Tamil Nadu, according to an estimate, the HR&CE Department controls over
4.7 crore acres of agricultural land, 2.6 crore
sq.ft. of buildings, 29 crore
sq.ft. of urban land owned by temples.
It is estimated that the rental income out of these must be several
thousands of crore, but only 3.6 crore were collected. In Karnataka, Government
controls over 4 lakh temples and in the undivided Andhra Pradesh, over 2 lakh.
On
the contrary, the Sikh Gurudwaras Act of 1925 brought
gurudwaras under the control of an
elected body of Sikhs and Government
has no role in their administration . A
central Gurudwara Board elected by Sikhs became the custodian of important Sikh
shrines. The Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak
Committee, formed in 1920 was recognized as a representative body
of Sikhs. The tradition of election is still going on in the administration of
gurudwaras. So also, Jain temples are
managed by Jains.
Muslims
guard their religious institutions and Imams are in charge of religious
activities of mosques. The Central
Wakf Board – a statutory body
established in 1964 is responsible for
proper religious services in mosques.
Control
over temples particularly big temples and those with large income has been a
cause for numerous litigations since independence. The famous and prosperous Nataraja Temple in
Chidambaram can best illustrate Temple-Government
struggle for control for over a century.
A Division Bench of the Madras
High Court in 1952 upheld the right of Podu Dikshitars (priests of the temple)
to administer the affairs of the temple
which was an age-old practice. The Supreme Court in 1953 dismissed Madras Government’s
petition seeking quashing of the high Court order.
In 2006, the Government of Tamil
Nadu – pioneer in State control of temples - took over this temple by an order.
It was upheld by a single-judge bench of the Madras High Court in 2009 on the
ground that a new law can overrule old judgements.
In
this protracted case, in 2014, the Attorney-General raised a question how
the Government could take over control
of a temple in a secular country. The
Supreme Court removed Government control and restored the rights of the temple
priests. It expressed concern over the
failure of various State Governments to manage temple affairs for the benefits of the
communities. In the Jagannath Temple at Puri, devotees
complained of intolerable harassment . Diversion of temple funds for various purposes including pilgrimages of
devotees of other religions took place.
One
cannot help comparing temples with places of worship of other religions. Hindu temples have to pay income tax on all
donations received while what is recognized as “minority institutions” are fully
exempt from income tax. Government
can have a say in the management of
educational and other institutions run by Hindu religious bodies, but must keep
distance from the institutions run by other religious bodies.
There can
be no objection to
mobilizing public resources
and utilizing them for development and welfare of all communities in a developing
society. But, a secular society has to
adopt uniform laws. The situation is fraught with serious flaws with no practicable solution.
In
Hindu temples, devotees are kept away from management. Hindus
do not have a recognized common
religious head or organization. There
are some denominational or sect leaders, but without acknowledged power or
authority. Their authority is mostly
restricted to theological questions or ritual practices which may be accepted
by those who have faith in them. This lack of organization, which strengthens
faith of the devotees in worship, may have
helped the take over of temples and other religious institutions easy for
temporal authorities.
In
this background, removing temples from State control may find sound supportive
arguments, but will require a lot of organizational changes in Hindu places of
worship.
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|