Chilkur priest challenges Kerala CM…

Chilkur Priest C S Rangarajan challenged the Kerala Govt. To close it's Devaswom Board as it was against Spirit of Secularism and selective in administering Hindu Temples.

Chilkur Priest C S Rangarajan challenged the Kerala Govt. To close it's Devaswom Board as it was against Spirit of Secularism and selective in administering Hindu Temples.
Chilkur Priest C S Rangarajan challenged the Kerala Govt. To close it's Devaswom Board as it was against Spirit of Secularism and selective in administering Hindu Temples.

After hearing the news that the Kerala assembly passed a resolution demanding the scrapping of the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), Chilkur Priest C S Rangarajan challenged the Kerala Govt. To close it’s Devaswom Board as it was against Spirit of Secularism and selective in administering Hindu Temples.

While presenting the resolution, the CM Pinarayi Vijayan had said the CAA was against the “secular” outlook and fabric of the country and would lead to religion-based discrimination in granting citizenship. “The Act contradicts the basic values and principles of the Constitution.

Sardar Patel had promised that the essential features of the Constitution of States will form the essential feature of Constitution of India in the Constituent Assembly.

While other religions are protected under Article 26 in the name of secularism Hindu Sampradaya is under threat from Secular State…

SC Ayodhya judgement has held that the legal personality of Hindu Deity is to protect the pious purpose of Deity incarnation and pious purpose of our ancestors who sacrificed to preserve it for the sake of future generations. Hindu Deity right is thus the collective right of Hindu Sampradaya

In view of the anxiety among the people of the country, the Centre should take steps to drop the CAA and uphold the secular outlook of the Constitution,” the CM had said.
Chilkur priest challenges this view further. The Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) which argued with its Advocates supporting Naishtika Brahmacharyam in the PIL did not file a review Petition and adding salt to injury supported the wrongful Judgement. Is it Secularism???

Historically, The Ruler Deity of Travancore who had thrown open all Hindu Temples to all classes and sections of Hindus and followed by people of Travancore instantly had also mandated in His constitution of Travancore in Article 4(b) as follows:- “Devaswoms, Hindu Religious Endowments and matters connected therewith shall be under our exclusive control and supervision and shall not in any respect, be within the scope or purview of the Council of Ministers or the Legislative Assembly. “

Sardar Patel had promised that the essential features of the Constitution of States will form the essential feature of Constitution of India in the Constituent Assembly. It finds its place in our Constitution in Article 26 as follows:-26.

Freedom to manage religious affairs Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right
(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;
(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;
(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and
(d) to administer such property in accordance with law

The article 26 was split into the various components (a), (b), (c) and (d) and only the administration of property is impacted by the law made by the legislature. This item Religious Endowment is moved into the concurrent list so that Union can ensure that the mandate of Article 26 is not violated by any State Legislature. Thus Article 26 is the most important article of our Constitution that the Ruler Deity who is the Ruler of all worlds had through his devotees got it inserted aptly but the Courts have misinterpreted.

Note:
1. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

C.S. RANGARAJAN

3 COMMENTS

  1. Reference to the article, I feel Mr Swamy and other intellectuals should ensure that the PIL filed by Dayanand Saraswati asking the SC to remove Govt control of Hindu temples through the Hindu Temples Endowment Act is discriminatory and against Hindus only, as the Churches and Mosques are not controlled by the Government. The liberated temples must be handed over to Trusts formed by Hindus and devotees who should manage the temples. One only needs to look at the plight of the priests and the temples to understand that money offered in temples as donations is looted and used for giving Haj and Jerusalem visit subsidies.

  2. I must say this article is an example of poor choice of words. Challenges? The state government and the CM have all the power to do as they please. The archakas are not their equals. The archakas are in a hopeless condition, but the article seems to portray this as a clash of equals..

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here