Recently, a political controversy erupted in Tamil Nadu on the issue of diverting temple funds for building colleges.

• Tamil Nadu’s model of regulating temple funds for secular purposes is rooted in a 200-year-old legislative framework.

Key Roles of Indian Temples

• Religious and Spiritual Role

• • Centers of Worship: Dedicated to deities (e.g., Vishnu, Shiva, Devi), temples facilitate rituals, festivals, and pilgrimages.
  • Bhakti Movement: Temples popularized devotion-based worship, uniting diverse communities (e.g., Ramanuja, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu).
  • Festivals: Temples organize events like Kumbh Mela, Rath Yatra, and Deepavali, fostering spiritual unity.
• Social Role
  • Community Centers: Temples serve as gathering spaces for cultural events, marriages, and community discussions.
    • Example: Annadanam (free food distribution) in temples like Tirupati and Guruvayur.
  • Social Justice: Movements for temple entry (e.g., Sabarimala case, 2018) ensured access for women and marginalized castes.
  • Education and Empowerment: Historically, temples ran gurukuls and pathshalas.
    • Modern temples support schools and vocational training (e.g., Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams’ educational initiatives).
• Cultural Role
  • Preservation of Art and Architecture: Temples showcase architectural styles: Dravidian (South India), Nagara (North India), Vesara (Deccan).
    • Examples: Konark Sun Temple, Meenakshi Temple.
    • Intricate sculptures, paintings, and inscriptions preserve cultural heritage.
  • Promotion of Performing Arts: Temples patronize classical dance (e.g., Bharatanatyam at Chidambaram Temple) and music (e.g., Carnatic music festivals).
  • Literature and Language: Temples preserved texts like Vedas, Puranas, and regional literature (e.g., Tamil Sangam poetry in South Indian temples).
• Economic Role
  • Revenue Generation: Major temples like Tirupati Balaji, Vaishno Devi, and Shirdi Sai Baba generate billions through donations, offerings, and tourism.
  • Employment: Temples employ priests, artisans, and administrative staff, supporting local economies.
  • Land and Resource Management: Temples historically owned vast lands, used for agriculture and community welfare.
    • Modern temple trusts invest in social projects like hospitals and schools.
• Political Role
  • Historical Influence: Temples were symbols of royal authority (e.g., Chola kings’ patronage of temples).
    • Donations to temples legitimized political power.
  • Modern Context: Temples influence electoral politics (e.g., debates over state control, Ayodhya Ram Temple).
    • Political parties leverage temple issues for mobilization.
• Social Reform and Inclusion
  • Abolition of Caste Barriers: Temple entry movements (e.g., Vaikom, Kalaram Temple Entry Satyagraha) challenged caste discrimination.
    • Constitutional support: Article 17 (abolition of untouchability), Article 25(2) (social reform).
  • Gender Equality: Sabarimala verdict (2018) allowed women’s entry, promoting gender justice.
    • Women priests in some temples (e.g., Maharashtra’s progressive temples).
  • Welfare Activities: Temples fund orphanages, hospitals, and disaster relief (e.g., TTD’s COVID-19 relief efforts).
• Temples as Centres of Cultural Tourism: Temples are integral to India’s cultural tourism, attracting millions of national and international visitors annually.

Historical Background of the Regulation of Temples in India

Pre-Colonial Era

• Temples were cultural and social hubs, with donations from kings supporting religious rituals, education, and welfare (e.g., schools, hospitals).
• Management: Traditionally managed by local communities or kings.

Colonial Era: British Regulation

• Early Regulations:
  • 1817: British East India Company introduced laws to regulate temple endowments due to concerns over mismanagement.
  • 1863: Religious Endowments Act allowed government oversight of temple properties to ensure proper use of wealth.
• Justice Party’s Contribution (1920s):
  • Elected in 1920 in Madras Presidency.
  • Introduced Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1922.
  • Faced opposition due to provisions allowing diversion of surplus temple funds for secular purposes.
  • Law enacted in 1925, setting a precedent for using temple funds for public welfare.
• Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (1925): Established the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board to manage temples’ secular functions and finances.

Post-Independence Legal Framework

• Constitutional Mandate:
  • Article 25 allows religious freedom, but allows regulation of secular aspects of religion (e.g., temple administration, financial transparency).
• Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Acts (1959): Allows use of surplus temple funds for secular purposes like education and welfare, ensuring transparency in management.
  • Section 36: Allows trustees to use surplus funds for purposes listed in the Act, with Commissioner’s approval.
    • Surplus: Funds remaining after temple maintenance and staff training.
  • Section 66: Permits use of surplus funds for establishing/maintaining universities or colleges.
    • Educational institutions must include study of Hindu religion or temple architecture.
  • Empowers Joint/Deputy Commissioner to redirect funds if original purpose is unfeasible.
  • Judicial Validation: The Act has been upheld by constitutional courts, reinforcing its legality.

Constitutional Provisions Relevant to Temples

• Article 14: Equality Before the Law
  • Ensures equal treatment under the law for all citizens, regardless of caste, gender, or religion.
  • Example: Sabarimala Case (2018) – Supreme Court allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala Temple, citing equality under Article 14.
• Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
  • Article 15(2): Ensures access to public places, including temples, for all citizens.
• Article 17: Abolition of Untouchability
  • Abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form.
  • Example: Temple entry movements (e.g., Vaikom Satyagraha, 1924-25) laid the groundwork for this provision.
• Article 25: Freedom of Religion
  • Article 25(1): Guarantees freedom to practice, profess, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.
  • Article 25(2): Allows state intervention to regulate religious institutions for social welfare or reform.
  • Example: Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Acts by states like Tamil Nadu regulate temple administration under this provision.
• Article 26: Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs
  • Grants religious denominations the right to establish and manage institutions, subject to public order, morality, and health.
  • Example: Padmanabhaswamy Temple Case (2020) – Supreme Court upheld the royal family’s rights but allowed state oversight for transparency, citing Article 26 limitations.
• Concurrent List (Entry 28) of 7th Schedule: “Religious endowments and religious institutions” allow both Centre and states to legislate on temple administration.

Management of Places of Worship in India

• Hindu Temples: A majority of Hindu temples are managed under state regulations. 
  • States like Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh have specific departments (e.g., HR&CE in Tamil Nadu) that oversee temple management, including finances, appointments of temple heads, and administration.
  • Example: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD), which manages the Tirupati temple, is under the control of the Andhra Pradesh government.
  • Income Utilization: Revenue from temples is allocated for the maintenance of smaller temples and welfare activities, such as hospitals, orphanages, and educational institutions.
• Mosques: Primarily managed by Waqf Boards under the Waqf Act, 1995, a central law administered by state governments.
  • Waqf Boards oversee mosque properties, finances, and maintenance, ensuring their use for religious and charitable purposes.
• Churches: Managed by dioceses, church councils, or trusts under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, and other laws.
  • Example: Church of South India (CSI) and Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI) oversee church properties and activities.
• Gurudwaras: Governed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) in Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925.
  • SGPC manages major gurudwaras (e.g., Golden Temple, Amritsar), overseeing finances, rituals, and welfare activities.
  • Smaller gurudwaras are managed by local committees or trusts.
• Jain Temples and Other Minority Places of Worship: Jain temples are managed by trusts or community organizations (e.g., Shri Mahavirji Trust in Rajasthan).
  • Buddhist monasteries (e.g., in Ladakh, Sikkim) are managed by monastic orders or trusts.
  • Parsi fire temples are managed by Parsi Anjumans or trusts with minimal state involvement.

State Legislation and Intervention

• Religious Endowments in the Concurrent List: Religious endowments and institutions are listed in the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, allowing both the Centre and states to legislate on the subject. 
  • This results in diverse regulatory frameworks across states .
• Specific State Laws: States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh have their own religious endowments laws, giving them authority over temple administration, income, and expenditure.

 Key Judicial Rulings

• Shirur Mutt Case (1954): The Supreme Court held that while the State cannot interfere in religious practices, it can regulate secular aspects like the administration and finances of religious institutions. 
  • This was a landmark ruling that clarified the State’s role in regulating temples without encroaching on religious freedoms.
• Ratilal Panachand Gandhi vs State of Bombay (1954): The Court upheld that the State could regulate property and finances of religious institutions but could not infringe upon the religious practices themselves. 
  • This reinforced the principle that secular regulation is permissible under Article 25 of the Constitution.
• Seshammal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1972): The Court ruled that the appointment of priests could be classified as a secular function, 
  • emphasizing that the administrative management of religious institutions could be controlled by the State, but the core religious practices would remain outside its jurisdiction.
• Pannalal Bansilal Pitti v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1996): The Supreme Court upheld the Andhra Pradesh government’s decision to abolish hereditary priesthood in temples
  • viewing it as a measure to promote social justice and inclusivity in the management of religious institutions.
• Adithayan v. Travancore Devaswom Board (2002): The Supreme Court ruled in favor of opening priesthood appointments to all castes.
  • Upholding caste-based inclusivity in temple administration, in line with constitutional principles of equality.

Arguments in Favor of State Control Over Temples

• Promotion of Social Justice and Equality: Articles 14 (equality), 15 (non-discrimination), and 17 (abolition of untouchability) justify state intervention to ensure temples are accessible to all, regardless of caste or gender.
  • Temples historically excluded lower castes and women (e.g., Vaikom Satyagraha, 1924-25). 
• Financial Transparency and Accountability: Major temples (e.g., Tirupati Balaji, Vaishno Devi) generate significant revenue through donations, which can be mismanaged without oversight.
  • Example: Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) uses surplus funds for education, healthcare, and disaster relief, benefiting marginalized communities.
• Preservation of Cultural Heritage: Temples are repositories of art, architecture, and history (e.g., Brihadeeswara Temple, a UNESCO site). Government oversight ensures maintenance and prevents encroachment on temple lands.
  • Collaboration with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for restoration of temples like Konark and Madurai Meenakshi.
• Public Welfare and Resource Utilization: Temple resources (land, funds) can address societal needs, fulfilling constitutional mandates (Article 46).
  • State directs temple revenues toward welfare programs, such as schools, hospitals, and community kitchens (e.g., TTD’s Annadanam scheme).
• Prevention of Mismanagement and Exploitation: Without regulation, temple trusts may prioritize elite interests or engage in malpractices.
  • Padmanabhaswamy Temple Case (2020) – Supreme Court upheld state oversight to manage the temple’s vast wealth transparently.
• Secular Governance: State control aligns with India’s secular framework (Article 25(2)), allowing intervention for social reform and public order.
  • State laws ensure temples adhere to constitutional values, such as abolishing discriminatory practices.

Arguments Against State Control Over Temples

• Violation of Religious Autonomy: Article 26 guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs, which state control may infringe.
• Politicization of Temple Administration: Appointment of trustees and officers is often influenced by political affiliations, leading to favoritism and inefficiency.
  • Political control risks turning temples into tools for electoral gains, undermining their sanctity.
• Selective Regulation and Secularism Concerns: State control is predominantly applied to Hindu temples, while other religious institutions (e.g., mosques, churches) face less regulation.
  • Lack of equivalent HR&CE laws for non-Hindu religious institutions fuels debates on fairness.
• Potential for Mismanagement by State: State-controlled temple boards have faced allegations of corruption and fund diversion.
  • Government officials may lack the expertise or commitment to manage religious institutions effectively.
• Resistance to Reforms vs. Tradition: State-driven reforms (e.g., women’s entry in Sabarimala) often face backlash from traditionalists, leading to social unrest.
  • Protests following the Sabarimala verdict (2018) highlighted tensions between state mandates and traditional beliefs.
• Commercialization of Temples: State control often emphasizes revenue generation (e.g., tourism, donations) over spiritual significance.
  • Overcrowding and VIP culture in temples like Tirupati, driven by state-managed systems.

Way Forward for the Management of Temples in India

• Clear Separation of Religious and Administrative Functions: There should be a clear distinction between the religious activities of temples (which should remain autonomous) and their secular functions, such as financial management and administrative oversight.
• Increased Transparency and Accountability: Temple management should adopt transparent financial practices, with regular audits and open access to information regarding temple income and expenditure.
• Promotion of Social Justice and Inclusivity: Inclusive policies should continue to be implemented to ensure equal access to temples for marginalized communities, especially women, Dalits, and Adivasis.
  • Caste-based discrimination must be eradicated through stronger enforcement of laws that promote temple entry reforms and inclusivity in priesthood.
• Balancing Secular and Religious Roles: The State should regulate the secular aspects of temple management (e.g., land, donations, administration) while ensuring that core religious practices are left to the management of religious bodies or communities, respecting the right to religious autonomy under Article 26.
• Support for Sustainable Practices in Temple Operations: Temples should be encouraged to adopt environmentally sustainable practices, such as water conservation and eco-tourism initiatives.
• De-politicization of Temple Administration: Efforts must be made to remove political influence from the management of temples, especially in the appointment of trustees and administration.
  • A merit-based system for temple management can help ensure effective governance and prevent the misuse of temples for political gains.
• Cultural Preservation and Heritage Protection: Temples must continue to serve as cultural repositories, preserving ancient art, architecture, and heritage.
  • Collaboration with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and other institutions can ensure the maintenance and restoration of temples as UNESCO World Heritage sites and cultural landmarks.

Conclusion

Temples, reimagined as “Temples of Social Justice,” can drive equality, welfare, and cultural preservation under constitutional mandates. Balancing state control with religious autonomy is key to realizing their transformative potential.

DOWNLOAD PDF