IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ramesh Ranganathan, R.C. Khulbe, JJ.
Subramanian Swamy - Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand And Others - Respondent
Writ Petition (P I L) No. 26 of 2020; Writ Petition (M/S) No. 700 of 2020
Decided On : 21-07-2020
JUDGMENT
Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. - The Uttarakhand Char Dham Devasthanam Management Act, 2019 (for short the "2019 Act") is the latest, in a long line of enactments, made by various States all over the country, both before and after the advent of the Constitution, entrusting management of Hindu temples to a Board whose Chairman and members are, by and large, nominated by the State Government. The statement of objects and reasons for introducing the 2019 Bill records the need to make legal provisions, for temples and devasthanams located in Uttarakhand, similar to Shri Vaishno Devi Mata Temple, the Sai Baba, the Puri Jagannath and Somnath temples.
2. Shri Mata Vaishno Devi temple, in Jammu & Kashmir, is under the management and supervision of the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board constituted under the J&K Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988. Shri Jagannath Temple at Puri is under the control of a temple management committee constituted under the Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1955. A challenge to its constitutional validity, on the touch-stone of Article 26-(d) of the Constitution of India, was rejected by the Orissa High Court in Ram Chandra Deb v. State of Orissa, (1959) AIR Orissa 5 and the judgment of the Orissa High Court was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Raja Bira Kishore Deb v. State of Orissa, (1964) AIR SC 1501 . The Somnath temple is managed by the board of a religious and charitable trust registered under the Gujarat Public Trust Act, 1950, and the Shri Shirdi Sai Baba temple is managed by the board of the Shri Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan Trust which is registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950.
3. Other than the above, the Lord Venkateshwara temple (popularly known as Tirupati Balaji temple) is also administered by a board, constituted under the A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987 called the TTD Board consisting of a Chairman and members who are nominated by the State Government. The constitutional validity of this Act was upheld by the Supreme Court in A.S. Narayan Deekshitulu v. State of A.P & others, (1996) 9 SCC 548 . The renowned Ramanatha Swamy temple at Rameshwaram, and the Meenakshi Amman temple at Madurai, both in the State of Tamil Nadu, are under the management and control of a board constituted under the Tamilnadu (hitherto Madras) Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The Shrinathji temple at Nathdwara, Rajasthan is also under the control and management of a board constituted under the Nathdwara Temple Act, 1959, the constitutional validity of which was upheld by the Supreme Court in Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji Maharaj v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., (1963) AIR SC 1638
4. The Mahakaleshwar temple at Ujjain is in the control of a managing committee constituted under the Madhya Pradesh Shri Mahakaleshwar Act, 1982, and the Guruvayoor temple in Kerala is under the control of the Travancore Devaswom Board constituted under the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. The Kashi Vishwanath temple at Banaras is under the management of a board constituted under the U.P. Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983. The validity of the 1983 Act was upheld by the Supreme Court in Sri Adi Visheshwara of Kashi Vishwanath Temple, Varanasi and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors., (1997) 4 SCC 606 . Two of the Chardham temples in Uttarakhand, i.e. Shri Badrinath and Shri Kedarnath temples, were, prior to the 2019 Act coming into force, under the control and management of a managing committee constituted under the U.P. Shri Badrinath and Shri Kedarnath Temples Act, 1939 which continued to remain in force till it was repealed by the 2019 Act.
5. Dr. Subramanian Swamy seeks to draw a distinction between the Somanth, Shirdi Sai Baba and Vaishno Devi temples on the one hand, and the temples brought within the ambit of the 2019 Act on the other, contending that, while the former are individual temples, the latter covers a large number of temples. It is necessary, in
A.K. Roy and others vs. Union of India & others
A.S. Narayan Deekshitulu vs. State of A.P & others
Acharya Maharajshri Narendra Prasadji Anand Prasadji Maharaj
Amarendra Kumar Mohapatra vs. State of Orissa
ANZ Grindlays Bank Ltd and Ors. vs. Directorate of Enforcement and Ors.
B. Shama Rao vs. Union Territory of Pondicherry
Balram Kumar Wat vs. Union of India & others
Bangalore Water Supply & Sewarage Board vs. A. Rajappa & others
Bank of Baroda vs. Rednam Naga Chaya Devi
Bhavnagar University vs. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd.
Budhan Choudhry and Ors. vs. State of Bihar
C.B. Gautam vs. Union of India & others
Casell and Co. Ltd. vs. Broome
Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta vs. Alnoori Tobacco Products
Deepak Bajaj vs. State of Maharashtra
Delhi Administration (NCT of Delhi) vs. Manoharlal
Dr. Nalini Mahajan etc. vs. Director of Income Tax (Investigation)
E.P. Royappa vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr.
Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. vs. Super Cassette Industries Ltd.
Escorts Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi II
Feroze N. Dotiwala vs. P.M. Wadhwani
Firm of A. Gowrishankar vs. Sales Tax Officer, Secunderabad & another
General Manager, North West Railway & others vs. Chanda Devi
Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. vs. Smt. P. Laxmi Devi
Gulabchand Chhotalal Parikh vs. State of Bombay (Now Gujarat)
Haryana Financial Corpn.v. Jagdamba Oil Mills
Herrington vs. British Railways Board
Hindustan Zinc Limited vs. Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission
Home Office vs. Dorset Yacht Co.
ICICI Bank vs. Municipal Corpn. of Greater Bombay
In the matter of Special Reference No. 1 of 1964
Ishwar Dutt vs. Land Acquisition Collector and Another
J.K. Industries Limited & another vs. Union of India & others
Jaisri Sahu vs. Rajdewan Dubey
K. Nagaraj & others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & another
Kedar Nath Singh vs. State of Bihar
Khajamian Wakf Estates etc. vs. State of Madras
Lakshamana Yatendrulu and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
LIC of India vs. Consumer Education and Research Centre
Lok Prahari vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.
London Graving Dock Co. Ltd. vs. Horton
M.L. Kamra vs. Chairman-cum-Managing Director, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and another
Mohanlal Goenka vs. Benoy Kishna Mukherjee and Ors.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Gurnam Kaur
Nand Lal & another vs. State of Haryana & others
Nar Hari Sastri and Ors. vs. Shri Badrinath Temple Committee
P. Kasilingam & others vs. P.S.G. College of Technology & others
Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corpn. Ltd. vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court
Rajeshwar Prasad Mishra vs. State of W.B.
Ram Chandra Deb vs. State of Orissa
Rev. Stainislaus vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.
S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
S.P. Mittal vs. Union of India
Sardar Sarup Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Ors.
Saurabh Chaudri and Ors. vs. Union of India
Shah Shivraj Gopalji vs. ED, Appakadh Ayiassa Bi and Ors.
Shri Venkataramana Devaru and Ors. vs. The State of Mysore and Ors.
Siliguri Muncipality vs. Amalendu Das
Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt
Sri Venkata Seetaramanjaneya Rice& Oil Mills and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. vs. McDowell & Co.
State of Bombay & others vs. F.N. Balsara
State of Haryana vs. State of Punjab
State of Kerala & another vs. The Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing (Wvg.) Co. Ltd & others
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rakesh Kohli and Another
State of Orissa vs. Mohd. Illiyas
State of Punjab vs. Bua Das Kaushal
State of Rajasthan vs. Mukanchand
State of Rajasthan vs. Sajjanlal Panjawat
State of U.P. v Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd.
State of West Bengal and Ors. vs. E.I.T.A. India Ltd. and Ors.
Subramanian Swamy vs. Director, Central Bureau of Investigation and another
Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association
Sushil Kumar Metha vs. Gobind Ram Bohra
Swamy Atmananda and Ors. vs. Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam and Others
T. Krishnan vs. G.D.M. Committee
T.M.A. Pai Foundation and Ors. vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.
Thakur Jagannath Bakshi Singh vs. The United Provinces
The State of West Bengal vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar
The Vanguard Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Madras vs. M/s Fraser & Ross & another
Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji Maharaj vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. State of U.P. and Another
Union of India & another vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & another
Union of India vs. Amritlal Manchanda
Union of India vs. Dhanwanti Devi
Union of India vs. Major Bahadur Singh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.