Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Religion Clause

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

Indian Court Rejects Constitutional Challenge To Appointment of Temple Manager

By Howard M. Friedman

India's national newspaper, The Hindu, today reports on an interesting religious freedom decision handed down Monday by the Madras High Court . The Lord Nataraja Temple in the town of Chidambaram is an important religious pilgrimage site. The Temple is operated by some 300 families know as Podhu Dikshidars. After alleged mismanagement in accounting for funds and offerings by the Dikshidars, the Tamil Nadu state government in 1982 appointed an Executive Officer to take over management of the Temple and of the offerings made there. The Dikshidars sued claiming that the order violated their religious rights protected by India's Constitution.

In Sri Sabanayagar Temple,Chidambaram v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras High Ct., Feb. 2, 2009), the High Court first focused on Article 26 of the Constitution that protects the right of every "religious denomination" to maintain its own religious institutions and manage its own religious affairs. The court ruled that the Dikshidars were not a religious denomination, so any claim they had fell under Section 25 of the Constitution that protects "freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion." The section goes on, however, to provide that this does not prevent the government from "regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice." The court ruled that management of the Temple and Temple offerings are not an integral part of religion or religious practice. Therefore they are not protected by Section 25.

Full post as published by Religion Clause on February 03, 2009 (boomark / email).