Context

• The recent controversy in Tamil Nadu over the diversion of temple funds for the construction of colleges has sparked intense political debates.
• Beyond the immediate political implications, the issue highlights a unique social justice model surrounding the regulation of secular practices linked to religion.
• This model, with roots in the erstwhile Madras Presidency, is grounded in a 200-year-old legislative tradition that continues to shape governance in South India.

Historical Background of Religious Endowments

• Regulation of Religious Endowments in India
  • The Religious Endowment and Escheats Regulation of 1817, enacted by the East India Company, laid the foundation for legislative oversight of temple affairs.
  • By the mid-19th century, when the British Crown assumed control over India, Queen Victoria’s proclamation of 1858 emphasised the need to avoid interference in religious practices.
  • This move was prompted by concerns over the religiously charged 1857 Sepoy Mutiny.
  • Despite this stated non-interference, the colonial state continued to regulate temple endowments for revenue and administrative control.
• History of South Indian Temples’ Endowments
  • Temples in South India have a long history of being more than mere places of worship.
  • Dating back to the Chola empire (970 AD), rulers lavished donations, both land and wealth, upon temples.
  • Historian Anirudh Kanisetti notes how queens like Sembiyan Mahadevi strategically endowed temples with resources, turning them into socio-cultural hubs.
  • During the Vijayanagara period, temples served as centers for education, culture, and welfare.
  • Architectural features such as spacious mandapams (pillared halls) bear testimony to their role in hosting educational and cultural events.
  • This historical precedent strengthens the argument that the use of temple funds for modern educational purposes aligns with the original intent of temple endowments.

The Legal Framework

• The legislative structure governing temple funds in Tamil Nadu and other parts of South India evolved through various statutes, culminating in the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Act of 1959.
• Section 36 of this Act explicitly permits trustees of religious institutions to utilise surplus funds, those remaining after temple maintenance and the training of its staff, for purposes sanctioned by law, with prior approval from the Commissioner.
• Furthermore, Section 66 allows surplus funds to be used for the establishment and maintenance of universities or colleges, provided that these institutions include studies on Hindu religion or temple architecture.
• The legality of this arrangement has been repeatedly upheld by constitutional courts, reinforcing the state’s right to manage temple resources in a manner that promotes public welfare.
• Within this legal framework, the diversion of temple funds for building colleges is not only lawful but also a continuation of the traditional practice of using temple resources for education and societal development.

The Debate Over Government Control of Temples, Social Justice and Reform

• The Debate Over Government Control of Temples
  • The debate over government control of temples cannot be reduced to mere legalities; it is deeply intertwined with the legacy of social justice in South India.
  • In the pre-colonial era, temple endowments were a means for rulers to fund welfare initiatives.
  • During colonial rule, state involvement in temple administration ensured the maintenance of these institutions and the allocation of resources for public good.
• Social Justice and Reform
  • The Self-Respect Movement of the early 20th century viewed temple regulation as essential to dismantling caste hierarchies and ensuring social equity.
  • Landmark reforms, such as the Temple Entry legislations of 1936 and 1947, were enabled by the government’s oversight of temple resources.
  • In modern times, Tamil Nadu and Kerala have become pioneers in appointing priests from backward classes, a milestone achieved after years of legal battles and social struggle.
  • Opposition to state management of temple affairs, therefore, risks undermining the hard-won gains of social reform.
  • Government oversight ensures not only lawful allocation of surplus funds but also the continuation of a broader egalitarian legacy.
  • A rollback of such measures would amount to undoing decades of progress toward caste equality and social justice.

Conclusion

• The controversy surrounding the diversion of temple funds for educational purposes is not merely a question of legality but also of historical continuity and social justice.
• The temples of South India have historically functioned as cultural, educational, and welfare institutions, a tradition preserved under the HR&CE Act of 1959.
• The use of surplus temple funds to build colleges is both legally sanctioned and aligned with the temples’ original role in community development.
• More importantly, it is part of a larger social justice model that has defined South Indian politics and society for over a century.