[ad_1]
A view of the Madras High Court, in Chennai. File
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
The Madras High Court on December 22 clarified that persons with political background can also be appointed as temple trustees if they were genuine devotees who had exhibited extraordinary devotion towards preserving the country’s culture, tradition and religious fervour.
Justices R. Mahadevan and P. D. Audikesavalu said, one of the 75 directions issued by them on June 7, 2021 had prohibited politicians from becoming temple trustees only to ensure that no one should be able to take control of temple admin istration solely on the strength of their political background.
The observations were made when Special Government Pleader (Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department) N. R. R. Arun Natarajan urged the special Division Bench to clarify its direction number 63 which prohibited people with political background from being temple trustees.
The SGP told the court that P. K. Sekarbabu, the incumbent Minister for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, himself was a very devout person and he had been the trustee of the famous Gangadeeswarar Temple, an ancient Chola period temple for Lord Shiva, at Purasawalkam in Chennai.
Agreeing that one could not be prevented from becoming a temple trustee solely on account of being a politician, Justice Mahadevan said, he was aware of a politician who was such a staunch devotee of Tiruvannamalai temple that he would give up politics if asked to choose between the latter and his devotion to God.
Further, referring to yet another politician highly devoted to the Palani Dhandayuthapaniswamy Temple, the judge said, it would be unfair to prevent such true devotees from becoming temple trustees. He said, a decision on allowing politicians to become temple trustees could be taken only on a case-by-case basis.
The 75 directions, touching upon almost every other aspect of temple administration, were issued on a suo motu writ petition taken up by the court in 2015. The SGP told the court that out of the 75 directions, 70 had to be complied by the State government and the HR&CE Department. The rest of the directions were to the Centre.
Of the 70 directions pertaining to it, the State government had no issues in implementing as many as 63 directions and required clarification only with respect to seven directions. It wanted the court to clarify three directions related to constitution of a heritage commission for sanctioning structural repairs to temples, murals and idols.
Similarly, it urged the court to permit engagement of external chartered accountants to audit accounts of temples with an annual income above ₹1 crore instead of insisting upon an audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General. It also wanted a clarification on the prohibition imposed on politicians from becoming temple trustees.
After hearing the SGP as well as temple activists Rangarajan Narasimhan, T. R. Ramesh, R. Venkataraman and advocate S. Padma on the issue, the judges said, they would pass the clarificatory orders after the HR&CE Department submits the draft rules framed by it for constitution of the heritage commission under the HR&CE Act.
[ad_2]
Source link