Why in News: The use of temple funds in Tamil Nadu for public welfare activities like building schools, hospitals, and providing aid to the poor has sparked debate. Supporters see it as social justice, while critics argue it violates religious freedom and secular principles.
Background and Recent Controversy
- A political debate erupted in Tamil Nadu over the use of temple funds to build colleges.
- The issue highlights a long-standing social justice framework around the secular regulation of religious institutions, especially in South India.
How are Places of Worship Managed in India?
1. Hindu Temples
Government Control:
- Most Hindu temples are managed by state governments.
- Example: Tamil Nadu’s HR&CE department oversees finances, appointments, etc.
- Example: Andhra Pradesh government manages the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD).
Income Utilisation:
- Revenue from prominent temples often funds the upkeep of smaller temples and supports welfare activities (e.g., hospitals, schools, orphanages).
Legal Basis:
- Article 25(2) of the Constitution allows state regulation of secular aspects of religious institutions.
2. Muslim and Christian Institutions
Community-Based Management:
- Governed by independent boards/trusts such as Waqf Boards or Church Trusts.
3. Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist Temples
Mixed Approach:
- Managed through a combination of community involvement and state-specific regulations.
4. Role of State Legislation
Concurrent List:
- Religious endowments fall under the Concurrent List, allowing both Centre and States to legislate.
- Examples of State-Specific Laws:
- Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act (1988) – outlines temple administration in Jammu & Kashmir.
- Different states have distinct laws, leading to variation in management.
Historical Background of State Regulation of Temples in India
Colonial Era:
Early Regulations (1810–1817):
- The East India Company enacted laws in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay to regulate temple administration and curb misappropriation of temple funds.
Religious Endowments Act (1863):
- Transferred temple management to local committees to secularise control, while retaining legal oversight through: Civil Procedure Code and Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920
Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (1925):
- Created the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board
- Empowered provincial governments to oversee temples through statutory boards of commissioners.
Post-Independence:
Law Commission Recommendation (1950):
- Advised regulation to prevent misuse of temple wealth.
Tamil Nadu HR&CE Act (1951):
- Established a dedicated department to manage Hindu temples and protect their properties.
Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act (1950):
- Introduced to govern religious institutions and their assets in Bihar.
Judicial Precedents on State Regulation of Religion
- Shirur Mutt Case (1954): Religious bodies can manage their affairs (Art. 26), but the state can regulate secular administration.
- Ratilal Gandhi Case (1954): Only essential religious practices are protected; state can regulate trust property.
- Pannalal Pitti Case (1996): Hereditary temple rights can be abolished; uniformity across religions not required.
- Stanislaus Case (1977): Propagation of religion doesn’t include the right to convert; anti-conversion laws upheld.
Arguments In Favour of State Control:
- Transparency & Accountability: Prevents mismanagement of temple funds.
- Social Reform: Ensures access to temples for all castes.
- Welfare Oversight: Ensures temple wealth is used for hospitals, education, etc.
- Protection from Exploitation: Shields temples from commercial or vested interests.
Arguments Against State Control:
- Violation of Religious Freedom: Article 26 guarantees autonomy in managing religious affairs.
- Political Misuse: Leads to interference and diversion of funds.
- Discriminatory Practice: Only Hindu temples are controlled, unlike other religions.
- Loss of Cultural Autonomy: Undermines community traditions and self-governance.
Way Forward
1. Clear Separation of Roles
- Religious vs. Administrative: Distinguish between spiritual functions and secular governance.
2. Collaborative Governance Model
A three-tier system can balance autonomy and accountability:
- State-level Temple Board: Include officials for oversight and policy direction.
- Temple Management Committee (TMC): Involve priests and community members for daily operations.
- Local Temple Trusts: Ensure local customs and cultural continuity.
This model is supported by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1991.
3. Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)
- Temple Development and Promotion Corporation (TDPC): Focus on tourism, digital upgrades, training, research, and temple networking.
4. Adopt Best Practices
- Kerala’s Devaswom Model: Promotes transparency and reduces corruption through institutional accountability.
UPSC Relevance
GS Paper II – Governance, Constitution, Polity
- Indian Constitution: Fundamental Rights (Articles 25–28), State-religion relationship
- Governance: Role of the State in managing public institutions, transparency and accountability
Mains Practice Question:
Q. “While State control over religious institutions ensures transparency and public welfare, it raises concerns over religious autonomy and discriminatory application.”Critically examine in the light of judicial pronouncements and constitutional provisions. (250 words)