1) Temples in India have a variety of ownerships ranging from individuals to communities and have long been important sites for religious rituals. 2) During British colonial rule, the administration began intervening in temple management through acts like the Bengal Regulation of 1810, leading to ongoing conflicts over the state's role. 3) Recent actions by the Karnataka government to acquire temples like Krishna Matt have been controversial given that communities have traditionally managed some temples. A review of the historical developments is needed to properly address this issue.

1. Some observations on Hindu
religious endowment acts
AAROHI
No. 192, 7th Main, 4th Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore
Webpage: www. aarohi.org.in
Email: chaitra78@gmail.com
M. S. Chaitra
1

2. Background
• Temples are important sites for ritual action
• Many ritual actions of Indians revolve around
temples
• They have variety of ownerships
• Ranges from Individuals to communities
2

3. Problem
• Temples are managed by community
• There is a constant dialogue and negotiation
• Colonial Administration intervened in it
• It was followed by Indian state after independence
• State’s role has been the contested ground
3

4. Problem
• From colonial management to till date conflicts exist
• Recent move by Karnataka Government is questionable
• Krishna Matt and Gokarna Temples are the issues
• How do we address the issue?
• This question warrants attention on historical
developments
4

5. History of the problem
• From colonial management to till date conflict exists
• Recent move by Karnataka Government is questioned
• Krishna Matt and Gokarna Temple are the issues
• How do we address this issue?
• This question warrants attention of historical developments
5

6. History of the problem
• Beginning of 19th century
• Establishment of East India company
• Control over temple in Salem and Puri
• Different policy actions for revenue and grants by the Company
• Establishment of Bengal regulation 19 (1810) and Madras
regulation 7 (1817) under Revenue acts
6

7. History of the problem
• Act no X of 1840 for temple of Jagannath at Puri
• 1857, Indian war against Company
• Queen’s proclamation in 1858
• Secular policy of the state towards religious endowments
• It had a history of European experience (British and French)
7

8. History of the problem
• Review of Endowment codes by British 1860
• Religious endowment act, 1863
• Various amendments, 1870, 1874, 1891, 1914,
1925
• Independent India started following the same
model starting from 1954
• Establishment of WAQF board, Hindu religion
Endowment boards, Gurudwara act, and
innumerable specific acts
8

9. Context of the problem
• Consolidation of property and grants by Company
• Bengal Code (for the due appropriation of the rents and produce of
lands granted for the support of Mosques, Hindu Temples, Colleges
and other purposes; for the maintenance and management).
• Indian Intellectuals support like Rajaram Mohan Roy (Letter to Lord
letter to Lord Amherst)
9

10. Issues
• Secular policy (do we understand it?)
• How did temple become a Religious Institution?
• Idea of Hindu, Jain, Buddhist religions
• Has anyone shown the existence of these
religions?
10

11. Issues
• Interference in temple administration
• Fixing the rituals and regulating them
• Communities can not have free access
• Eventually degenerates the tradition
11

12. Krishna matt
• It is managed by 8 Matts at Udupi
• It is entirely matter of Madhva Community,
related to those institutions
• Can state acquire such community institution?
• Like Land acquisition is there a framework?
12

13. Financial issues
Year Temple Nos
Temple
revenue
Temple
expenses
Percentage
of revenue
Mdrasa
+ Haj
Church Others Others
1997 2,64.000 52.3 13.3 18 9.3 3 22.8
Rural and
Women
developm
ent
1998 2,67,073 58.3 16.5 25 14.3 5 22.6
Health,
Rural
1999 2,67,000 67.3 15 41 27 8 17.3 NA
2000 2, 62,038 69.9 13.7 50 35 8 13.2
Haj
Victims
2001 2,54,038 71.6 11.5 63 45 10 5.1 NA
2002 2,51,012 72 10 69 50 10 2 NA
13

14. What can be done?
• Immediate repealing of endowment act is not possible
• Karnataka religious endowment act 2011 is faulty
• Except for those disputed and property without community
claim can be with state
• State must withdraw from temple management in phase
wise manner
14

15. What can be done?
• We need to develop new language for these debates
• Religion, Sacred, Worship etc. are not the right categories of
this debate
• The issues are linked to proper understanding of discourse
of secularism
• Reflecting on how to get out of the colonial legacy
15

16. 16