India’s Supreme Court recently delivered a significant pronouncement, affirming that the sacred offerings made by devotees to temples are not intended for the construction of marriage halls. The apex court underscored that these religious endowments cannot be categorized as public or government funds, thereby reinforcing their unique purpose.
This ruling upholds a previous decision by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, which had invalidated government directives permitting the use of funds from five distinct temples across Tamil Nadu for building marriage facilities. The High Court’s earlier order, issued on August 19, explicitly stated that the government’s plan to construct and rent out marriage halls using temple money did not align with the definition of ‘religious purposes.’
Presiding over the appeals against the High Court’s judgment, a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta questioned the underlying intent of devotee contributions. Justice Nath observed, ‘Devotees offer their money for the spiritual upliftment and maintenance of the temple itself, not for commercial ventures like marriage halls.’ He further pondered, ‘Is a temple’s sacred ground truly serving its purpose if it hosts wedding celebrations featuring inappropriate music?’
Instead, the Supreme Court suggested that these invaluable funds should be channelled towards genuine charitable endeavours, such as supporting educational institutions or establishing medical facilities, aligning more closely with the spirit of devotion. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, alongside other legal counsel, presented arguments on behalf of the petitioners. The core of the legal debate, the Bench highlighted, revolved around the propriety of the government’s decision regarding temple fund utilization.
While the Supreme Court acknowledged the intricacies of the challenge, it has agreed to a full hearing, scheduled for November 19, allowing for a comprehensive examination of the matter. The High Court’s decisive ruling was a direct response to a petition that contested the government’s orders sanctioning the construction of marriage halls using temple resources.
It was disclosed that the government’s directives stemmed from an announcement by the Minister for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department during a Budget speech in the Assembly. The Minister had outlined plans to build marriage halls in 27 temples, projecting an expenditure of ₹80 crore from temple funds. The petitioner argued vehemently in the High Court that, according to the stipulations of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, and its associated rules, the government lacked the authority to appropriate temple funds, even surplus ones, for such commercial construction.
Furthermore, the petitioner asserted that temple funds are fundamentally non-commercial in nature and that these government orders directly contravened Sections 35, 36, and 66 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act of 1959. In defense, the State’s counsel informed the High Court that Hindu marriages are indeed religious activities, and the government’s intention behind constructing marriage halls was to provide an affordable option for devotees to conduct these ceremonies.