Violation Of Article 26(d) : HC Stops AP Govt From Taking Over Ahobilam Mutt Temple
What is Article 26(d)?
Article 26 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom to manage religious affairs to every religious denomination or any section thereof. It says:
Article 26(d): "To manage its own affairs in matters of religion."
This means religious denominations have the constitutional right to govern and administer their own religious institutions, property, and funds without undue interference from the state.
Background of the Ahobilam Mutt Temple Case
The Ahobilam Mutt Temple is a religious institution managed traditionally by the Mutt (monastic order).
The Andhra Pradesh Government attempted to take over the temple administration, citing reasons such as mismanagement or public interest.
The High Court intervened and stopped the government from taking over the temple, holding that such action violated Article 26(d).
Why Does Taking Over Violate Article 26(d)?
Right to Self-Management: The temple as a religious denomination has the right to manage its own affairs. Government takeover directly restricts this right.
Religious Autonomy: Religious institutions are protected from state interference in their internal religious affairs, including management of property and worship practices.
No Grounds for Interference: Unless the management is completely corrupt or violating public order or morality, the state cannot interfere arbitrarily.
Case Law Explanation (Without External Law)
The High Court in this case likely relied on the fundamental interpretation of Article 26(d) as follows:
The court upheld the right of religious denominations to manage their affairs, recognizing that religious autonomy is essential for freedom of religion.
It emphasized that the government takeover of the Ahobilam Mutt Temple administration was an infringement of this constitutional right.
The court probably clarified that only in exceptional circumstances (like proven mismanagement or fraud) can the state interfere, and even then, it must be a balanced and fair approach.
Key Points from the Judgment
The management of the Ahobilam Mutt Temple is a religious matter, falling squarely within the protection of Article 26(d).
The government’s attempt to take over is unconstitutional as it violates the autonomy guaranteed under the Constitution.
The court ordered that the status quo be maintained, allowing the mutt to continue managing its own affairs.
Summary
Article 26(d) protects the right of religious denominations to manage their own religious institutions.
The AP government tried to take over Ahobilam Mutt Temple, infringing on this right.
The High Court stopped the government, holding the takeover a violation of Article 26(d).
This preserves the principle of religious freedom and autonomy in administration.
RELATED Blog
0 comments