|
Letter to
Shri M Karunanidhi, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu
Subject:
Temple Lands under trusteeship
of Hindu religious and Charitable Endowments belong to Hindus and their usage
must be decided by the Hindu community representatives, their Religious leaders
and Organizations.
Hon'ble
Chief Minister Karunanidhi,
We
would like to bring the following extremely serious issue to your attention and
for immediate action:
According to a recent report
various state and Central Govt. departments have requested allotment of temple
lands, currently under the trusteeship and management of the Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowment (HR and CE) Board in Chennai. The Endowment lands asked for
belong to: a) Somanatha Swamy Temple at Kolathur, b) Varadaraja Perumal Temple,
c) Dhandeeswarar Temple, d) the Vedapureeswarar Temple, e) Kapaleeswarar Temple,
Mylapore; and f) Venkatesa Perumal Temple at Sowcarpet , for which the Board is
planning to issue a public notice calling for objections from the people
(Attachment A).
Such a procedure of issuing a public notice for acquisition would imply as if
the lands are abandoned with no one to claim their ownership. The Govt. must
realize that the temples and their endowments have been built over centuries by
our forefathers and it is the community which is the real owner and which must
have the final say through its representatives and religious leaders in the
management and utilization of temple resources. The endowments are basically
intended for use for Hindu causes and for sustenance of temples in perpetuity.
Your Govt. will notice that such autonomy is exercised by the minority
communities and is permissible under the provisions of the Secular Constitution
of India.
1) Govt. Control of
Temples violates
Laws of the Land:
The Govt. is charged with the responsibility of upholding the law. But in the
present case the state violates the national constitution by robbing the Hindus
of their freedom and 'Religious Rights' as guaranteed under the Indian
Constitution.
The Supreme Court of
India on Friday (August 14, 2009)
directed that the Karnataka Govt. may not take over the management of any temple
in the State under a law enacted in 1997.
A Bench headed by Justice R V Raveendran stayed Section 25 of the Karnataka
Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, that empowered
the State Govt. to take over the management of temples. “Section 25 of the Act
is stayed,’’ the Bench said after the State Govt. failed to defend itself with
reasoned arguments (Attachments B, C).
In September 2006, a Karnataka High Court Division Bench
comprising Justices Gururajan and C R Kumaraswamy struck down the entire Act as
unconstitutional. The Bench found the Act as arbitrary and violative of Articles
14, 25 and 26 of the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court stayed the High
Court order on April 2,
2007, following a special leave petition (SLP) by the State Government.
Earlier, the Allahabad High Court had directed the Central
and Uttar Pradesh authorities to prepare a scheme for establishing a Board for
Hindu religious organizations on the pattern of the UP Muslim Waqf Board.
Anticipating possible abusive
and/or dishonorable designs in various administrations the
Indian Parliament adopted a law in 1991
specifically requiring that -"the status of religious places, as on
August 15, 1947
shall be retained".
The state Govt. is duty bound to uphold this commitment made by a national law
and let the religious places remain outside Govt. Control as they were in 1947.
In case of conflicts or contradictions between the state and national laws the
national law enjoys the precedence.
Despite such valid judicial decrees the State authorities
have grossly misused and abused the powers delegated to them under the
Concurrent List (Article 246 (2), Seventh Schedule) on religious institutions.
Instead they went ahead and made unwarranted acquisition of temples and squarely
discriminated against Hindu religious institutions, while leaving the liberty
and freedom of other religionists in managing their institutions untouched and
unhindered. No explanation was ever
provided for this illegal discrimination against the majority community’s
religious institutions and their estates.
2) Only dharma Acharyas and saints have the religious and spiritual
background and authority to guide religious shrines.
Here are some basic questions the state govt. must ponder upon in public
interest: What authority, background and special training the Govt. operatives’
posses for controlling every aspect of the Hindu cultural & religious centers.
What national or state law gives them power to supersede the fundamental
principle of secularism - neutrality towards religions - enshrined in the Indian
constitution?
Why not allow autonomous Hindu boards to govern temples under the guidance of
religious leaders, just as it is permissible in the case of other religions? The
Waqf Board of Muslims and the management of Christian religious institutions
have vast funds, properties and endowments, in addition to the immense flow of
foreign funds - yet their independence and autonomy is left intact! What is the
justification for denying this freedom to Hindus?
3) Govt. denies Vital Functions of temples:
The temples are not just for rituals by purohits and objects of tourism as the
endowments department would have us believe, but also the centers of community's
socio-cultural and religious life, a place of learning with Acharya, about
community sewa e.g. augmenting educational and health facilities in public
interest for the needy with the temple resources by the donors as the
missionaries do, dharma prachar and for character building and sense of public
service that eradicates corruption.
The exposition of the grandeur of Hinduism - its Vedas, Upanishads, Ramayana,
Mahabharata, the Bhagwad Geeta - its glorious ancient culture, spirituality and
values that the community would like to project and propagate - are not only be
denied by state control, but the deliberate and irreversible Govt. actions in
liquidating resources of endowments, leading to the decimation of Hindu
religious infrastructure, are unacceptable to the billion strong Hindu community
worldwide.
4) The Govt. must restore community’s role in temple management
through Hindu Advisory Councils: Such Councils could play a role in oversight and decision
making process of the endowments department and
temple Trusts. Additionally
these Councils elected or nominated by the Community, state and national
religious leaders could shoulder these responsibilities. They could also stop
desecration and decimation of the religious infrastructure taking place under
Govt. control, pending denationalization, and till autonomous Boards are
constituted for taking over the charge.
5) Hon'ble Chief Minister, may we suggest the following for your
kind attention and urgent action to rectify the injustices inflicted upon
Hindus:
a) Freeze all plans and
actions, in the domain of temples and endowments except for their routine
maintenance, pujaris salaries, temple rituals, etc. The current proposals for
sale of the temple lands must be cancelled forthwith. Only the representative
bodies of Hindus have legal, social and religious competency to determine the
pathways for utilization of such assets, as is the practice in other religious
formations.
b) Constitute a Waqf like Hindu Board, as decreed by
the Allahabad
High Court, for overseeing the management of Hindu religious institutions;
c) Initiate measures for setting up Hindu Advisory
Councils. It should be followed by introducing transparency, openness, public
scrutiny and accountability in the endowments department;
d) Declare a time table for ending Govt. control of
Temples and for
transferring their jurisdiction in its entirety to autonomous Hindu Boards;
Both legislators and cabinets are elected under the decree of the
constitution. While administering the oath of office they make a commitment to
uphold the Indian Constitution. However, by singling out the Hindu religious
infrastructure for discriminative practices they engage in violating the same
constitution which they swore to uphold. What an irony!
Thanks for your time and
consideration. We are hoping for receiving an early response reflecting equality
of all faiths as expected under the true form of secularism.
Dr. Jagan
Kaul
Krishan Bhatnagar
Hindu Jagran Forum (USA)
August
15, 2009
Attachment A
Allotment of vacant
temple lands sought
The
Hindu, August 11, 2009
R. Srikanth
Six proposals from various
departments received by the HR and CE Board
CHENNAI: The Hindu Religious
and Charitable Endowment (HR and CE) Board has received requests from different
Central and State government departments for allotment of vacant lands belonging
to temples in the city.
Proposals
According
to officials on the Board, a total of six proposals have been received from
government departments seeking vacant lands belonging to different temples in
the city for construction of a police station, post offices and an electricity
sub-station.
Police station
The
Police Department has requested land measuring around 32,000 sq. ft. belonging
to Somanatha Swamy Temple at Kolathur for construction of a police station.
Likewise, the Postal
Department has
asked the Board for constructing post offices in Aminjikarai and Velachery in
vacant lands belonging to Varadaraja Perumal Temple and Dhandeeswarar Temple.
A proposal has been
sent by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB)
seeking allotment of five acres of land for construction of a sub-station in a
vacant land at Thiruverkadu.
The vacant land belongs to the Vedapureeswarar Temple.
Also the Tamil Nadu
Water Supply and Drainage Board has requested for 3,600 square feet of land belonging to
Kapaleeswarar Temple,
Mylapore.
Likewise,
a vacant land belonging to
Venkatesa
Perumal
Temple
at Sowcarpet has been requested by
SIDCO.
Public notice
An
official of the Board said that the requests from the various government
departments are being studied, after which a public notice will be issued
calling for objections from the people.
Fixing land value
The next
procedure would be fixing the value of the land, which would be 1.5 times the
guideline value prevailing in the area, he added.
Once the
value of the land has been fixed, the proposal would be forwarded to the State
Government for approval.
Post office
Confirming that a request has been sent to the HR and CE Board seeking a vacant
land at Velachery, a Postal Department official said that at present the post
office at Velachery is in a rented building and suffered from space constraints.
We have
requested around 3,000 sq. ft. of land, so that a post office would be
constructed to ease inconvenience for the residents of the area, he added.
A letter
has been submitted to the HR and CE Board requesting for allotting six cents of
the vacant plot located at
Dhandeeswaram Nagar 7th Main Road.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/08/11/stories/2009081158740200.htm
Attachment B
SC curbs State bid
to control temples
Pratap Patnaik, New Delhi:
Deccan Herald, Aug 14, 2009
The Supreme Court on
Friday directed that the Karnataka government may not take over the management
of any temple in the State under a law enacted in 1997.
A Bench headed by Justice R V Raveendran stayed Section 25 of the Karnataka
Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, that permitted
the State Government to take over the management of temples. “Section 25 of the
Act is stayed,’’ the Bench said after the State Government failed to defend
itself with reasoned arguments.
Appearing for Udupi and Dakshina Kannada Temples Management Association, senior
advocate K K Venugopal and advocate Sharan Thakur sought direction restraining
the State Government from taking over the management of temples. State
Government advocate Sanjay Hegde said the Supreme Court had earlier stayed the
Karnataka High Court ruling.
“If
committees are constituted under the 1997 Act, the applicants will be put in
irreparable injury and hardship,’’ said a petition filed by the Sahasra
Lingeswar temple and others.
In September 2006, a Karnataka High Court Division Bench comprising Justices
Gururajan and C R Kumaraswamy struck down the entire Act as unconstitutional.
The Bench stated it was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 25 and 26 of the
Constitution. However, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court order on April 2,
2007, following a special leave petition (SLP) by the State Government.
The State Government’s argument was two-fold: protecting the livelihood of
70,000 priests and managing hundreds of temples and trusts.
These issues were at the centre of a controversy between the temples and the
state government ever since the Act came into being.
The State Government had submitted that a high-powered committee headed by
Justice M Rama Jois had been formed to look into the grievances of the priests
and other office bearers of the temples.
The priests and temple trusts challenged the Act in the High Court, claiming it
was discriminatory and not uniformly applicable to all religious institutions,
including mutts.
The State
Government had issued notices to over 200 temples in
North Karnataka, including the Banashankari temple in Badami,
Veerabhadreshwara temple at Godachi in Raibagh taluk of
Belgaum district and the
Hanuman temple in Haveri, informing them about the appointment of committees
that would recommend taking over their management.
DH News
Service
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/17158/sc-curbs-state-bid-control.html
Attachment C
Pvt temples out of govt reach now
TIMES
NEWS NETWORK
August 14
(?), 2009
Bangalore: Private temples needn’t fear intrusion by the government now. In a
judgment that brings relief to hundreds of private temples in Karnataka, the
Supreme Court on Friday modified the stay order of
April 2, 2007
with respect to the Karnataka Hindu Charitable Institutions and Charitable
Endowments Act.
This
means Karnataka cannot take over of temples or appoint any committee to govern
them. The state, following the stay, was issuing notices to take over the
management under Section 25 of the Act.
Advocate
G S Kannur said Section 25 isn’t applicable to Sikh, Jain or Buddhist temples
and, therefore, discriminatory. A long-drawn debate The Question Of Govt
Managing Private Temples Has
Engaged Court For Years
Bangalore: Should governments manage — howsoever remotely — private temples?
This question has been engaging courts for a while now.
In 2006,
the Karnataka high court division Bench headed by Justice R Gururajan had
quashed the entire Karnataka Hindu Charitable Institutions and Charitable
Endowments Act. This followed an appeal by Hindu temples, trustees, archaks and
others aggrieved by the HC judgment of September 9, 2005, which upheld the Act.
The
Bench had noted that the Act is violative of the right to equality under Article
14 as it discriminates between temples and mutts and mutt-run temples. Mutts are
not included in the Act.
Devotees of Hindu temples provide kanike (offerings) for temple purposes and
it cannot be spent for other non-Hindu causes without any relevance to Hindus.
The
Bench had objected to the government spending 5% of the temple turnover money
for other purposes. Money is taken out of Hindu temples to provide for poor
institutions of other religions. The Gururajan Bench had objected to this
provision by specifying that there can be no compulsion only from Hindu temples
to provide assistance to such institutions. Such contribution cannot be
compulsory.
The
apex court in 2007 had granted a stay on the Gururajan Bench order and the state
had been issuing notices to take over temple management.
toiblr.reporter@timesgroup.com
|
