The recent controversy over Tirupati Laddu Prasadam, has once again stirred the debate over the State control of temples in India. The State control over temples in post independence India started with the state of Tamil Nadu (then Madras), which brought a law for state control over temples. Currently, other states in India also have legislations for the management of Hindu temples, which includes the states of Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Odisha, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.
However, these laws of state control of temples in India, have been critiqued by several Hindu religious organisations in the past, on account of treatment of temples as milch cows and non-representative temple boards. In this article, we will look into the issue of state control of temples in India.
What has been the History of State Control of Temples in India?
According to census 2011, Hindu temples form the majority of the around 30 lakh places of worship in India. The State control of temples in India has a long history, starting from the colonial period to post independent India.
| Colonial Period | a. The East India Company enacted laws in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay between 1810 and 1817, which allowed interference in temple administration to prevent income misappropriation. b. The Religious Endowments Act (1863) passed by the British government, aimed to secularise temple management by transferring temple control to committees. However, the government retained influence through legal frameworks like the Civil Procedure Code and the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act (1920). c. The Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (1925) established a statutory body, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board. It empowered provincial governments to legislate on temple matters, and allowed oversight by a board of commissioners. |
| Post Independence Period | a. The law commission of India recommended enaction of legislations to prevent the misuse of temple funds. b. The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (TN HR&CE) Act, 1951, provided the creation of a Department of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments for the administration, protection, and preservation of temples and their properties. c. Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 was passed in Bihar to regulate the religious institutions. |
Constitution Provision Providing for State Control of Temples
Article 25(2)- Article 25(2) allows the state to regulate economic, financial, political, or secular activities linked to religious practices and to enact laws for social welfare, reform, and opening Hindu religious institutions to all classes of Hindus.
Seventh Schedule- Religious endowments and institutions are listed under the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, allowing both the Centre and states to legislate on the subject.
What are the Judicial Precedents providing for state control over Temple Management?
| Shirur Mutt vs. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras Case, 1954 | The Shirur Mutt case set important precedents for the protection of religious freedoms and property rights in India. The Supreme Court (SC) of India ruled that the state can regulate the administration of religious or charitable institutions. |
| Ratilal Panachand Gandhi v. State of Bombay Case, 1954 | The SC held that the state can regulate the administration of trust properties. |
| Pannalal Bansilal Pitti vs. State Of Andhra Pradesh Case, 1996 | The SC upheld a law abolishing hereditary rights over temple management and rejected the argument that such laws must apply equally to all religions. |
What are the arguments in favour of state control of temples in India?
1. Prevention of Temple Mismanagement- The central argument presented in favour of temple management control is the enhancement of transparency in the administration of temple funds, and reduction of risks of misappropriation and corruption. Government oversight helps in the responsible and ethical management of temple funds.
2. Protection from Commercialization- Government involvement in the management of temple funds is aimed at their prevention from commercialization and exploitation by vested interests.
3. Promotion of Gender Equality- State management of temples is aimed at ensuring that the temples’ services and resources are accessible to all devotees regardless of their gender. For ex- Travancore Devaswom Board supported equitable access to the temple for women in the Sabrimala Temple entry case.
4. Redistribution of Resources- The revenue generated from temples is redirected towards state initiatives that benefit the wider community, such as the infrastructure development or social welfare programs. For ex- HRCE Department of Tamil Nadu uses temple funds for community development programs such as establishing schools, colleges, and hospitals.
5. Religious and Cultural Inclusivity- State control ensures that temples adhere to constitutional principles of inclusivity for the individuals from vulnerable communities. For ex- In Tamil Nadu, the HRCE Department has worked on ensuring temple entry for Dalits and backward communities in several temples that traditionally restricted access.
6. Prevention of Exploitation of Devotees- State control aims to protect devotees from exploitation by temple authorities, such as charging of exorbitant fees for rituals or financially burdening practices. For ex- Temples in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, setting up guidelines on fees for rituals and offerings.
| Read More- 7 PM Editorials |
What are the arguments against State Control of Temples in India?
1. Unfair Treatment- According to critics of government’s temple control, while the government controls Hindu temples in several states, other religious institutions, such as mosques, churches, and gurdwaras, are generally allowed to manage their own affairs independently.
2. Mismanagement and Bureaucratic Inefficiency- Government-appointed boards or officials often lack the expertise, commitment, or religious understanding necessary to manage temple affairs effectively. This often leads to mismanagement, and bureaucratic inefficiency in the management of temple affairs.
For ex- Allegations of corruption, poor administration, and neglect of temple properties by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HRCE).
3. Diversion of Temple Funds- The diversion of temple funds for secular activities has often been opposed by the devotees. For ex- The protests by devotees against the diversion of religious funds for secular activities.
4. Erosion of Temple Heritage and Traditions- The imposition of administrative norms by the state that are not aligned with the spiritual and ritualistic aspects of temple management, often leads to the erosion of temple heritage and traditions. For ex- The support to the entry of women in Sabrimala by the Govt, has been at odds with the temple’s ritualistic traditions.
5. Decline in Devotee Trust and Participation- Critics argue that the bureaucratic control of the temples leads to decline in the participation and involvement of devotees in temple management.
6. Economic Mismanagement of Temple Assets- In states like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, there have been numerous reported cases of temple land encroachments by the private individuals or the government entities. This further fuelled concerns regarding the economic mismanagement of temple resources by the State.
7. Better Management through Private Trusts- Critics of the state control over temples argue that the temples that are not under state control, such as the Shirdi Sai Baba Temple Trust in Maharashtra, successfully run charitable hospitals, schools, and community programs.
What Should be the Way Forward?
1. Greater Autonomy with Oversight- Establishment of independent temple trusts comprising local religious leaders, community representatives, and legal or financial experts. The government should only undertake the oversight functions.
For ex- Management of Temples on the lines of the management of Golden temple by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), which is independent of state control.
2. Greater transparency and accountability in case of temple funds- An independent auditing body should conduct regular financial audits of temples and public disclosure of temple funds must be made mandatory.
3. Formation of Devotee Councils- Local councils comprising devotees and community leaders could be formed to advise on temple management, rituals, and festivals. This would empower the community to safeguard the religious and cultural traditions of the temple.
4. Government as a Custodian of Heritage, Not Manager- The state’s role should shift to that of a custodian responsible for preserving the heritage and architecture of ancient temples.
5. Collaboration with Religious Leaders- Temple funds could be used for social welfare programs such as healthcare, education, and poverty alleviation, but only after consultation with temple authorities and religious leaders.
| Read More- The Hindu UPSC Syllabus- GS 2- Constitutional Provisions |
Discover more from Free UPSC IAS Preparation Syllabus and Materials For Aspirants
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
