First of all, I'd like to thank Srijan Foundation and therefore I'll have to thank Abhinav Prakash Singh and Rahul Deewan, Alok Govil and Piyush Jain for actually giving me this opportunity. He has already given a bit of my introduction and lawyers tend to speak a lot about themselves so I'll try not to do that. I'll try and get into the topic straight.

I'd like to build from where he's actually left the introduction, just to say that it's ironic that the majority is actually discriminated against. I don't think it's ironic in this country at all. I don't find it surprising or I don't see a bit of irony in it at all.

And I don't think that I'm alone in sharing this sentiment. Fortunately a good number of people in this country, they've woken up, they've started paying attention to the things around them. I think the average middle class person who has been paying attention to his livelihood has also woken up that if he focuses exclusively on livelihood, survival will become an issue after some point of time.

There's something that I'd like to start with before I get into the meat of the topic. There are any number of articles that are available if one were to just Google with respect to the number of temples that have been encroached upon, the number of temple properties that have been alienated, the number of jewels that have been stolen and the kind of meager amounts that temples make with respect to the properties that they've leased out on. There's so much of information.

It's not as if I need to say something new which doesn't exist already in the public domain. Then why is it that there is a lack of action with respect to these issues? Why is it that there is a certain lack of activism with respect to these issues? Why is it that people are not as troubled as they're supposed to be with respect to what's happening around them? I think it goes back to two central issues which I think more or less dictate outcomes in most situations, attitude, knowledge and initiative. These are the only three things.

I don't see anything else being responsible for the current state of affairs. Apathy I think is central for whatever is happening and I think the consequences of apathy become very very clear if one were to just take a look at the legislations that control some of these temples in some of these states. Even for a person who is not legally trained, who has absolutely no skills when it comes to interpretation of the law or statutes or so on and so forth.

These legislations are crying to be toned down. These legislations are crying to be struck down. It's just surprising.

In fact, I started writing on these issues only around I think December 2015 onwards and before that I was doing a bit of preliminary reading and when I read these legislations the first question that I asked myself is why has it taken so many years for these legislations to be challenged before the court? Some of these legislations date back to 1927, then 1951 and 1954. The 1954 legislation that currently applies to Tamil Nadu goes back to the 1927 legislation which was repealed and then they came out with the 1951 legislation. The Supreme Court struck it down for the first time in the Shirur-Mutt case of 1954 and if somebody were to see the legislation that was struck down in 1954 and compare it with the legislation that came subsequently, they'll ask themselves what is the difference? No difference at all.

Nobody has bothered to undertake even a textual comparison of what was struck out, what was struck down and what is in force today to ask themselves how did the state legislature have the guts, the gall, the gumption and the audacity to bring something back into force which the Supreme Court of the country has struck down as fundamentally unconstitutional and this goes back to two specific, I think perhaps socio-political reasons before I get into what is it that we can do about it and why is it that we need to do something about it. Pardon me for saying this but the cause of the temple has unfortunately become the cause of a single caste. It has become associated with a certain community or a certain group or a certain caste which I think is fundamentally wrong.

That perception needs to go, it needs to be thrown out of the window. A temple belongs to every caste, every subsect and every community within the Hindu fold. Let there be no two ways about it, let there be no illusions about it.

Therefore when a temple is affected, it doesn't matter whether it is run by a certain group or a certain subsect or a certain set of followers, what happens to them and what affects them is bound to affect you because the very same actions will be extrapolated and extended to your own institutions. There is no escaping this, there is absolutely no escaping this. Therefore the first thing that we need to do is to shake off a bit of inertia and ask ourselves why is it that this inertia has lasted for so long and I think it is simply because we have a very philosophical approach to most of these world issues.

Sanatan dharam hai, toh sanatan hi rahega, it will continue, it has continued, it has withstood the ravages of time and history and therefore it will continue to withstand the ravages of time and history and it will not be lost in the mists and sand of time, so I think that's more or less our justification, I think perhaps for our own cowardice, inertia, weakness, lack of collective action, lack of cohesive action, lack of concerted action and I think this is the first step, this is the first thing that needs to be addressed. Now let me just read out something which I have been dying to read out to an audience because this more or less is symptomatic of what is happening and I think this more or less tells us why we are where we are today. So I am just quoting from a decision of the Supreme Court of 1966 with respect to the AP legislation that was challenged and the Supreme Court was given a certain argument as to why is it that these legislations are exclusively applicable to Hindus.

Why is it that these legislations are exclusively applicable to Hindu institutions? What was so peculiar about it? So let's put it this way, let's say Rahul Gandhi, the principal or let's say the teacher in a classroom, he has the power to slap every pupil or he has the power to show every other book to us, but Rahul chooses to do this exclusively with respect to one student or one class of students, which means there is a power that has been given to him institutionally in order for him to exercise this equally across classes, across communities, across groups. But Rahul chooses to focus his energies exclusively on one community. And this gives rise to two or three conclusions.

One, he believes that that is the only community or that is the only section of students who deserve special attention either because they are weak or they are fundamentally flawed in their character and therefore their character needs some kind of intervention. That is the assumption and that is the message that Rahul sends out. Secondly, treating different people, unequal people differently is inequality and I would say unequal application of power is also inequality.

I don't see a distinction between them. The consequence is more or less the same. If you choose not to apply the power or enforce your power or exercise your power with respect to X number of communities and you choose to make one community the target of your power or the exercise of your power, I think you are sending out a very wrong message.

And I think this for me is the textbook definition of what amounts to discrimination. There is no two ways about it. You don't need to be an expert in law.

You don't need to be an expert in constitutional law. You don't need to be an expert in jurisprudence for the simple point to be understood and addressed. Let's see what the Supreme Court has said with respect to this and this becomes very important for us.

Now, I will just read this out. And this is the classic argument that's been given with respect to a lot of interventions in the Hindu society. Bear with me for just a few minutes while I read this out because this more or less will tell you what is the attitude of not just the executive or the government arm of the state but equally of the judiciary with respect to Hindu institutions.

Now, it's up to us to see if this sentiment or this attitude of 1966 has carried on to 2016, we are about 50 years down the line. Let's just pay attention to this and this is very, very important. So, this is the argument that is presented on behalf of the petitioners who are challenging the legislation, the Andhra Pradesh legislation with respect to its constitutionality.

It says, the main thrust of the arguments of the Learned Council for the petitioners is that articles 25 and 26 guarantee freedom to manage religious affairs and right to freely profess, practice and propagate the religion to all citizens alike. Hindus constitute majority population and Hindu religion is the major religion in the country. Equally, Muslim, Christian and Parsi citizens are entitled to the same constitutional rights under articles 25 and 26.

Without touching the administration and governance of charitable or religious institutions or endowments founded or maintained by Muslims, Christians or Parsis, making law regulating the administration of Hindu religious institutions and above endowments, offends articles 14 and 15 which deal with equality. This is the argument that was made. It is also contended that when a denomination which is a part of the major religion is protected by article 26, the major religions themselves as genus are equally entitled to protection under article 26 which is to say, if Vaishnavites are entitled to protection under a certain provision of the constitution, Hindus as a whole are equally entitled to the same protection because Vaishnavites form part of Hindus.

Institutions belonging to them cannot therefore be regulated under the law, offending their right to religious practice. This is the argument that was in essence made. Let's see what the supreme court says and this will remind you of certain arguments that have been made with respect to other aspects of the constitution.

The first question is whether it is necessary that the legislature should make law uniformly applicable to all religious or charitable or public institutions and endowments established or maintained by people professing all religions. Now here comes the secular narrative. In a pluralist society like India, in which people have faith in their respective religions, beliefs or tenets propounded by different religions or their offshoots, the founding fathers while making the constitution were confronted with problems to unify and integrate people of India, professing different faiths, born in different castes, so on and so forth.

The directive principles of the constitution themselves visualized diversity and attempted to foster unity, uniformity among people of different faiths. A uniform law though is highly desirable, enactment thereof in one go perhaps may be counterproductive to unity and integrity of the nation. In a democracy governed by rule of law, gradual progressive change and order should be brought about.

You see some sentiments are more important than others. Making law or amendment to a law is a slow process and the legislature attempts to remedy where the need is felt most acute. So the judiciary feels that remedy is most imperative when it comes to Hindu institutions.

You see that is the logic, that is how we interpret pluralism, that is how we interpret secularism, that's how we enforce constitutional mandates and values in this country. The point that we have to understand is this. This question which was addressed in 1966 continues to be relevant in 2016 and the one question that we are entitled to ask is that are you saying that in the last 50 years other societies and other communities have not become amenable to application of similar legislations? It's been 50 years, this was in 1966, we are in 2016.

Understood that in 1966 after 19 years of independence you are saying that I think Hindu institutions need most intervention. Are you saying post 50 years of the judgment that the situation still says it's only Hindus who need this? People must read the report of the Justice Chalakundaya commission which is the parent document which forms the basis of the 1987 Andhra Pradesh legislation which applies to Hindu religious institutions. That document I am sorry to say offends all sense of fairness, all sense of reasonableness and takes for granted the patience of the majority community and takes for granted the dignity of the majority community because that document categorically says that Hindu institutions and Hindu temples and Hindu religious institutions and endowments are the ones where corruption abounds or there are instances of corruption and since it relates to 80% of the population, if you remedy 80% of the population in a society, the rest of the 20% will fall in place.

This is the beautiful logic that is given. I don't see how this is different from the logic that was applied by West Pakistan with respect to East Pakistan, wipe out 3 million people, the rest of them will listen to you. That's more or less the logic that they gave, those were the instructions of General Tikhakhan.

So the point I am trying to make is, this attitude needs to be questioned. Now how do you question it? What do you do? And first of all before why do you do it, how do you do it, let's ask ourselves one question. Why is it, the topic is Hindu institutions from state control.

Let me just qualify it a bit, as a lawyer I need to refine it a bit more because we revisit drafts over and over again, so let me do this. We are not asking for the state to do anything that is unconstitutional, let's be clear. Second, what we are asking for is not something that needs a constitutional amendment as well.

It can be done well within the four corners of the constitution as it exists today. There's no need for a random revolutionary abrupt upheaval as far as the constitution is concerned. Let's be very clear about that.

Two, we are saying this, either interfere with everyone equally or don't interfere with anyone at all. And should you choose to interfere with us, start with everyone and after that you are only entitled to do that which the constitution permits, therefore you need to know what the constitution permits. But again before I go to my comfort zone which is the law, I will go to something else.

We need to understand the reason why Hindu institutions are in dire need of this kind of an intervention. Look at the status of our temples, look at the state of affairs of our temples, look at the state of affairs of all the communities that are dependent on temples. It's not just about the priest, let's be very clear about that.

It goes much beyond that. Is there anyone here who's… So there is a group of castes called the Ambalavasis. Ambalavasis are basically the Marars, the Chakyars, the Pothuvars, the Warriors and I think you have totally eight castes which fall under this.

Each of these castes have been designated based on the profession or their vocation within the temple. Ambalam means a temple, pardon me if I am wrong, I think that's the case. And people whose profession or vocation relates to the temple, this is Ambalavasis.

At least eight castes derive their livelihoods from the temple. What does this tell you? Temple as far as the Hindu society is concerned has not just been a centre of religious importance. It plays a social function, it plays a religious function, it plays an economic function.

That's very, very important. You see all the beautiful architecture of the Governing Temples, I am sorry, the South Indian Temples, all that is just not there. There is a specific Vedic architecture, there are principles that are to be observed and the people who do this, they are not Brahmins.

They actually come from a different community altogether. Vishwakarma… These are the people who are responsible for this. This is a dying breed today.

We don't have people who understand how do you play around with that piece of stone. They have genders for stones. This is a female stone, this is a male stone.

They identify stones down to that level. They know what they do. That is a dying breed in this country because a good number of vocations and professions that run or survive or were related to temples have effectively been put on the verge of extinction because the temple institution as an institution itself is on the verge of extinction because it is being uprooted from its traditional roots.

Systematically this has happened over the years. When the Britishers did it, at least they had no reasons to feel any sense of attachment as far as Indian institutions are concerned. They don't belong to this country or they never belonged to this country.

But if the same policy has continued post 1947, either we believe that the Britishers were right or we have always remained colonial slaves even mentally. This needs to change. And the reason this also needs to change is this.

For the average Hindu, regardless of which part of the country he resides in, the temple is still the place that he goes for spiritual solace. He doesn't go to ashrams. All these babas and ashrams, they come secondary as far as he is concerned.

In fact, for the average Hindu in any part of the country, he is intimidated by million dollar ashrams. He will not step into that place for the simple reason that the grandeur of the place, the scale of the place would perhaps scare him. He doesn't feel at home as far as those institutions are concerned.

Therefore, he looks to the temple as far as spiritual solace is concerned. Therefore, if you want Hinduism to survive, then the aastha has to survive in the average Hindu. And for that, those institutions to which he can relate to, they must be resuscitated, they must be revived.

We also, in most of our debates, discussions, post dinner katha kalakshepams as I call it, we are warned to say these things. Philanthropy as a concept is fundamentally alien to Hindu institutions and Hindu society. That's a very fashionable statement to make.

They make these points. Hum sirf kamaana jaante hain. Hum daan karna nahi jaante hain.

The word daan has such a significance as far as Hindu tradition and Hindu literature is concerned. Gyan daan or any kind of daan has immense importance. We worship heroes who are known for being daanweeds.

That is the tradition of this country. Now why is it that Hindu institutions are not in a position to involve themselves in charitable activities? If the church next to you or the mosque next to you or the gurudwara next to you is in a position to spend X number of rupees or X number of dollars for whatever they think is important and for the causes they relate to, why are Hindu institutions unable to do so? Most of us arrive at the simplistic and ignorant conclusion that because dene ki niyat hi nahi hai or that we are not interested in Hinduism, that is wrong. Unfortunately, our hands are tied.

This is something that we need to understand. Hindu institutions are under state control. Therefore, they do not have the kind of freedom that other institutions have or other communities have in dealing with their own property, in dealing with their own traditions, in spending on their own traditions, in spending on their own community.

A padri or a pastor can at least speak with someone who is immediately higher up in the hierarchy and invest in what he calls his congregation, his sheep, his flock, whoever it is. That's what he can do. Can a priest, you ask yourself, have you asked yourself in any temple that you have been to, can a priest do anything for the devotees or the followers? He can't.

The temple administration is entirely in the hands of the state. If we do not recognize the fact that administration of Hindu institutions have been completely eviscerated, emasculated, disemboweled, devotees or Hindus have no role to play in their own institutions, I think we are hurtling towards the extinction of our own traditions and our own way of life. Let us see how this happens.

Without getting too much into the legalese, let me try and give you a broad framework as to how these legislations function. Whenever possible, thanks to Google and thanks to open databases these days, anybody can read any judgment relating to any aspect of the law. It's not difficult at all.

You don't need a lawyer to do this at all. I just need to give you some details and you will be able to pull it out yourself. So there is a decision of 1924, Supreme Court, which goes by the name Shirur Mutt decision.

This relates to a mutt that was located in Udupi in South Canada. And this institution was put through such excruciating litigation that if I were to be the Muttadhipati of the particular institution, at the end of the litigation I would have asked myself, I think it is time that we should proclaim that being born as a Hindu is a sin. For the simple reason that the legislation functions on this premise.

Let me tell you how it works. So this is the state. The state draws its power from articles 25 and 26 insofar as religious freedoms are concerned.

25 broadly relates to individual religious freedoms and 26 relates to religious freedoms of religious denominations and therefore it speaks of institutions. And there is an interplay between 25 and 26. There is an interplay between the two.

Under 25, there is a beautiful provision 25-2A of the constitution which specifically says that insofar as secular, economic, political or such activity is concerned, the state shall have the power to make laws. And all of these activities are meant to have some kind of nexus with a religious practice. What is the purpose behind this legislation in the first place? Let's understand this.

Which means, Ashish is a good friend. Let's say, he chooses to write away his property in the name of a temple and he calls this, this is my endowment to this particular temple. I have decided to donate this.

Ashish has always wanted that the property be used only for the benefit of the particular temple and only in the interest of the particular temple for the purposes of the temple, in relation to the temple, with respect to the temple, in reference to the temple, nothing else. This is what he has always wanted. Should somebody within the temple administration choose to divert that resource and put it for a different use altogether and diverts the very purpose of that endowment 252A is the provision that can be exercised by the law and say, I want a legislation in place which ensures the temple administrators do not have the power or the wherewithal to divert resources from the actual purpose for which it was endowed to the institution.

That is the actual purpose. Meaning thereby, the money and the resources are meant for investment in the community. They are meant for investment in the institution.

They are meant for the furtherance of the cause of the particular institution and the community. So any attempt to deviate from that particular path is what 252A basically is meant to stop and prevent. Let's see how we have actually interpreted it.

This is where a lawyer's bag of tricks, they come into play. What the judiciary has effectively done is to basically say, so previously I said it relates to secular activities connected to religious practice. Meaning thereby financing for a religious practice.

That nexus must never be broken. That umbilical cord is sacrosanct. The judiciary has said, you know what, let's break this altogether and put secular activities in one basket, religious activities in another basket and create this distinction.

Why? To say, you see, I respect your right to religion because I will not touch this basket. That's entirely your prerogative. But in so far as this basket is concerned, it is secular.

And therefore the state has the right and the power under the constitution to interfere with it. Why this distinction is fundamentally flawed? I'll tell you why. Can you perform a puja without having the resources for the puja? Can you conduct an event within the premises of the temple without having the necessary resources for it? If you want to offer food, where will the money come from? If you want to perform a puja, where will the money come from? If you want to perform a prayer, where will the money come from? Where will the money come for the performance of religious activities? From the secular box.

But who controls the secular box? The state. Meaning thereby, if the religious activity were to be the puppet, all the secular strings are in the hands of the master puppeteer, which is the state. So who is going to dance according to whose tunes? The religious practice and the religious tradition and the customs and rituals will now dance to the whims and fancies of the state, which is the puppet, which is the superpower in this case.

This distinction was ostensibly evolved to protect religious rights and to assert control over secular rights. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, this has worked to the detriment of the Hindu community and there is no running away from this conclusion. Every activity, however religious it may be, will have a secular angle to it because money will be somewhere.

There will be a non-religious aspect of the particular activity and if every non-religious aspect is entirely within the domain of state control, you have encircled the religious activity with state control. Consequently, what you are left with is an academic paper right called as a religious right which can give you What does this result in? How many people are aware of this famous instance where the Ramakrishna Mission rushed to the state saying I want to be a minority institution? This is what? This is the reason if there is no benefit of being a majority, then become a minority and to become a majority, if you have to bear all this, then you have to try and jump into the other bandwagon where the sun is rising. Human tendency, Why do you think conversions happen? This is the basic reason.

This is the basic psychological reason and we have to understand today we talk of whenever we say conversions are bad or conversions may not be wrong fraudulent conversions are wrong we have to do something about it this fashionable elitist wine tasting section of the society will immediately tell you you Hindus have never bothered you Savarnas have never bothered to invest in the other classes of the society and today when they are converting you have a problem with it their church does something for them their mosque does something for them is your temple doing something for them let them do it, they will do it our hands are completely tied my fundamental belief is that if anybody is interested in a cohesive Hindu identity and I don't mean this in a confrontational sense at all, not because we need to face someone else or not because we have to create the other or face the other simply so that all of us can feel a sense of bonding with each other without caste gender, religion, language anything coming between us it starts only with the reform of the temple it starts only with the democratization of the temple, I am not saying that every tradition from the past is necessarily right, some things we may not agree with, but who gets to ask this question, who gets to do this introspection it is us if every other community has been given 50 to 60 years to gradually progress and evolve why shouldn't Hindus be given the same rights and the same freedom this is a community that has put up with the Hindu code which has put up with all kinds of interventions in its ways of life consequently why don't you put faith in this introspecting community to find its own solutions for its own internal challenges, but this will not happen as long as the nerve center of the Hindu identity is in the hands of the state.

I may actually once in a while actually think that actually we are living in a Hindu state there is a good reason if the state has so much commitment then it should be a Hindu state we didn't ask for a Hindu state you didn't make it we never asked for it, you did this yourself please take out the manner in which funds from the endowments department in the state of Karnataka have been put to use and you will ask yourself how is this constitutional by any yardstick, any benchmark any stretch of imagination there are details for it and I will circulate it money from the Hindu endowments board have been used to fund two things the holy land pilgrimage for Christians and Hath subsidies so Hindu money is being used for doing this I would actually say if I were a Christian or a devout Muslim I would be offended that we don't have money, that's the first question they will ask why do we need this Khairat that will be the first question they will also ask importantly let's give this a constitutional peg this activity fundamentally militates, violates, contravenes article 27 of the constitution article 27 of the constitution very clearly says access or any proceeds there from or there of public funds can never be used by the state for the promotion of any particular religion 27 specifically separates the state from the temple or the church or the mosque therefore when you divert these funds from the Hindu endowment board it is on paper, it is on record it is not an inference that anybody has had to draw they have admitted this if that is the case, you have violated article 27 and these are the people who preach constitutional values and free speech to us the state of Maharashtra has admitted before the Bombay high court as to how much of revenues from the Siddhivinayak temple are used for purposes other than temple related purposes who has to take that call, the temple has to take that call, therefore they will say temple has consented to it, but who is sitting inside the temple as the temple administrator, your own appointee so is this consent, free consent this is not exercise of free will, this is not a voluntary contribution a state appointee sits within an institution and he acts as the interface between the institution and the state and he nods to everything that the state says how is this voluntary by any definition students of law, contract law, sections 14 to 19 where is free consent here it doesn't exist it doesn't even exist even on paper I will read something out just for the sake of illustration so that you see the horrendous extent to which legislation such as these have been used to strip Hindu institutions of every ounce of control or say in their own institutions I will read this out for you for me this document I would say is the master template of what is wrong with all the HRC legislations, the Hindu religious and charitable endowments legislations across the country I will tell you the background of this document and then we will get into this there is an infamous section in the Tamil Nadu Act which is section 45 which deals with appointment of executive officers by the state to Hindu institutions who will be in charge of the administration of that particular place in 1965 the Supreme Court came out with a decision again in relation to a Tamil Nadu institution and that state has a peculiar history when it comes to how it manages temples how it treats temples specifically saying that under no circumstances will the state encroach upon the administration entirely why is this? because article 25-2A from which the state draws its power specifically refers to only regulation or restriction of secular activities, not entire control, not administration it means that you will give a framework for a specific objective for a specific purpose to curb a certain mischief or a mismanagement and you will let the community choose its own appointees who can implement that framework but you will not impose yourself into that framework nor will you let your state appointee entrench himself inside that framework because that would result in complete takeover of the administration the Supreme Court in the judgement categorically strikes a distinction between supervision and takeover of administration in 2015 correct 2015, the Supreme Court comes out with another decision, sorry 6th of December 2014, 6th of December 2014, the Supreme Court comes out with another decision where Mr. Subramani Swamy was actually representing the cause of the Sabha Nagar temple famously known as the Chidambaram temple where the Supreme Court categorically interprets section 45 and the general scheme of these legislations to say the state if it has to respect the rights of religious denominations under article 26 to manage their own institutions in accordance with law should not impose itself entirely into that institution and it says you are limited to regulation and restriction but not takeover of administration it has categorically said so what was this judgement passed in the context of from 1954 to 2014 until the day of the judgement executive officers were appointed across the state in the state of Tamil Nadu with respect to every temple including temple which has let's say revenue less than a lakh or 10,000 so on and so forth they have appointed, they have all been taken over but no reasons or no speaking order has been passed as to why the temple deserved to suffer the presence of an executive officer in the first place if you appoint an executive officer with respect to a certain temple aapke mann mein itna to hona chahiye ki daal mein kuch kala hai and that must reflect on paper and you must give reasons this is the basic principle of natural justice when a state chooses to interfere with the administration of a private institution tell us the reason why you think it is your right to walk into this place not a single reason was offered, no evidence was placed before the supreme court as to why so many executive officers were appointed across the state of Tamil Nadu and importantly when an executive officer is appointed he can stay in that place only as long as the mischief exists once the mischief is rectified or corrected he has no business sitting in that place he has to get out he has to be necked out of the place all these orders are indefinite insofar as the time is concerned that means ek baar baith gaye to baith gaye there is no way he will get out of the place so the supreme court says all your appointments under section 45 if they are in violation of two conditions meaning you have not identified the mischief nor have you set a time period they are all violative of the constitution and article 26 that's what the supreme court says so the babus in the state department of Tamil Nadu they come out with a new set of rules because under section 45 they should have actually prescribed rules for appointment of executive officers rules hi nahi the november 2015 tak aur sabko appoint kar diya the appointment should have happened under the rules rules did not exist so they came out with the rules if the supreme court tells you, you have violated the law and all your past appointments are wrong, it can't be your case ki naye rule mein aap yeh kahenge jo kuch bhi maine pichla kiya tha sab legal hai that is not the gangotri where you get to wash all your sins that's what they did in this document they are basically saying aap maan lijiye ki jitne bhi appointments kote saare ki saare legal the chalo maan liya is this a game that is being played in a high school you have chosen to walk into institutions of a certain community under the garb of a certain provision that says that rules ought to have been formulated for the appointment of an executive officer and there must be an identification of mischief or mismanagement in order for you to step into that place you don't have rules nor are you showing the reasons why you had to enter that particular place and when the supreme court says come out with rules for future appointment aapne past mistakes ko bhi saaf kar diya this is nothing but laundering of your mistakes what else are you doing black to white and this thing you just have to read this I'll just read out certain portions and this will be stark I'll just try to be as low as possible where the commissioner either sumo to or upon the report received from the joint commissioner or deputy commissioner so on and so forth having jurisdiction considers it necessary now it starts now actually the game begins that in the interest of an ensuring better proper and efficient administration and management of any religious institution he'll appoint an executive officer itna lamba chauda broad clause it's an omnibus clause you can do whatever you want in the name of this second that he has reason to believe that there is persistent default in administering affairs of any religious institution fine I'm fine with this now that there is irregularity that there is malpractice that there is misappropriation and here comes the 10th beauty for any other reason iska matlab yeh hua ki agar yeh boxing match hota I would say belt ke neeche waar nahi hoga and my next rule will be kahin bhi maar sakte ho isko kehte hain legal fiction this is legal gimmickry I give a six set of rules and I identify those parts of the body which are not supposed to be attacked and then I come out of the final rule saying it's no holds barred free for all jo kar naik kar lo for any other reason this is the beauty therefore as far as I am concerned this is nothing in fact these rules alone and Mr. Ramesh is here he is working with me or rather I am working with him he is my client in these petitions he represents the temple worshippers society both of us each time we read this I would like to introduce him he is the man the brain behind all these actions and I challenge you there is not a single lawyer in this country who knows the provisions of each of these legislations better than him I have sat at his feet to learn all of this the kind of facts and the kind of data if he walks into a temple in Tamil Nadu today they shiver they tremble the administrators know here comes trouble so why I am saying this is everything that is wrong with these legislations I can prove only with this document if I need to blow to smithereens each of these legislations I only need to read out these rules in the court that's all I need to do I don't need to support it with case law nothing it shakes the conscience of any reasonable objective person how can you say that you will appoint anyone in Hindu religious institutions for any other reason give the reasons they are meant to be specific it has to be a time period and here is the thing the commissioner may after holding such enquiry consider it expedient or interest for such period or periods as may be specified by the commissioner not exceeding 5 periods or 5 years so first time he will appoint for 5 years then he will renew for another 5 years this will continue so how do you overcome or circumvent the rule which says give specific period yes I will give specific period but I will renew it infinitely this is like a top up where you don't have to pay money it goes on it violates the first law of thermodynamics it is a self perpetuating machine it lives on its own it doesn't need anything so if you read these provisions it is a slap on the face of the Hindu community and I think this community deserves it I am sorry to say this because you have been taking it lying down for too long if I were a lawyer in Tamil Nadu or if I had access to these legislations I would ask myself what better case do I need to drag the state over hot coals in the court we are so bothered about encroachment of free speech by the state because that is a fundamental right this is equally a fundamental right because this comes under part 3 of the constitution had this been any other community whose rights were being steam rolled like this I think the reactions would have been starkly different and certainly not constitutional I will just read out one more thing and these are things I want to read out bear with me for a few moments it says yeah the executive officer shall be responsible for the proper administration of the religious institution so he shall be responsible for the proper administration of the religious institution not the trustee not the management not the board of trustees and the directions he may issue may be lawfully carried out and here is the thing all the staff and servants shall work under the immediate control and superintendence of the executive officer every appointee in that institution will now be subservient to the state appointee now you see how this basket works I have touched only the secular basket so what is your problem because now you have ensured that the person who is supposed to perform the religious practice will have to listen to the executive officer who is in control of everyone I am supposed to be working with in the institution and this is the insidious manner in which these legislations function this is just one more thing and I will show how they have washed all their sins nothing contained in these rules shall adversely affect the powers of the executive officer who has been holding the post immediately before the date of these rules this is your Ganga all the sins have been washed away here this is not just with respect to Tamil Nadu there are provisions of the Andhra Pradesh legislation which have given the executive officer the power to ensure that there is regular bhajan kirtan inside the temple he has the power to decide he will ensure that there is bhajan kirtan on a regular basis who made you its contractor on one hand we are saying I have the right to be an atheist on the other hand given the right through its executive officer to force us to sit and do bhajan kirtan on one hand Manjira on the other hand Dholak this is effectively how it functions am I wrong sir there is a provision such as this we were aghast when we read this out in a meeting we were reading this I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry really if I had a Janusian face half of my face would be laughing and half of it would be crying the point is these instances abound in several such legislations you must have read the news reports of the Maharashtra government asking Siddhivinayak temple and Shirdi temple to part with 50% of their money for construction of hospitals noble intentions are infested in this path to hell it is not wrong to use the money for construction of a hospital will you give credit for this that will never be forthcoming Hindu institutions and Hindu God men so to speak are meant to be cesspools of corruption the stereotype that we will perpetuate they are the cesspools of sleaze they are the cesspools of pilfering of public money and they are the cesspools of superstition while this stereotype will be constantly perpetuated you will never give credit for the fact that Hindus have been silent and tolerant when each of their institutions have been consistently taken over by the state please understand this is only with respect to secular activities religion is being interfered with tomorrow I don't think I can even celebrate Rakhi next year I don't know Red Bindi gang will come shouting this is against this, this is against that, you don't know tomorrow a woman walking behind a man as part of Saptapati will be against feminism now we will do the opposite we will do clockwise and anti-clockwise we will do everything the opposite systematically while there is an assault on secular aspects of our institutions there is equally an assault on religious aspects the reason for the interference here is that secular is different from religious therefore I will sit on this I will preside over this now what is your justification for sitting on religious issues free speech equality discrimination, superstition you have created every kind of facade necessary to interfere with the Hindu way of life period how do you address this my humble request is and I don't want anybody to judge me for saying this or even if you judge the point is do not put faith in any political entity because any political entity will do whatever is expedient and necessary for its own survival put faith in your own collective initiatives put faith in your ability to come together as a group to represent your community's interests you are not fighting with any other community you are only asking the state to back off you are only asking the state to stay within its constitutional limits you are asking the state to observe the rules of the constitution you are asking the state to uphold the rule of law I don't see how this is unreasonable I don't see how this is communal I don't see how this is fundamentalist I don't see how this makes us a Hindu Taliban you are asking for the upholding of the constitution of the democratic republic of India and you are asking the state to stay within its limits do not enter and violate our spaces the one thing that I think we as a community perhaps must learn and perhaps learn from others let's say all these so called free speech groups is that they have realised the value of sustained advocacy and pressure you don't need to get down to the streets you don't need to incite anyone into committing any offence you don't need to do anything that is violent or unconstitutional put faith in the constitution and exercise your rights under the constitution and explore all the means available under the constitution to their fullest possible extent how is this wrong how is this wrong it may be politically incorrect for a lot of people but is this wrong, that is the question if it's not wrong, I think we should do this I think as part of an initiative the one thing that we are hoping to do is to come out with a crowd sourced database with respect to all these activities and we are hoping to translate this into a nationwide campaign to go after every government, I say so in public which thinks it's ok to walk into the rights of Hindu institutions you don't get a god given right a margin right as far as Hindu institutions are concerned just because we happen to be unfortunate Hindus this cannot happen today you have access to information like no other generation atleast in the past, future may ho sakta hai lekin past mein to nahi tha you have enough people with the resources to invest in this and it doesn't take too much actually, this is not commercial litigation, although for them it's commercial litigation, for us it's not commercial litigation all it takes is sustained action all it takes is for a bunch of people to do this and we hope to do this in the future one of the questions that I keep getting asked whenever we speak on this issue or write on this issue is ye sab toh theek hai, but if you remove and approve this mechanism which exists today, what is your alternative? what do you do? a known devil is better than an unknown angel nonsense and I'll give you a straight answer, why? the continued existence of an illegality is no reason for it to continue just because you don't have a legal alternative you can't say that women can continue to be ill-treated merely because there is no law which addresses a certain form of ill-treatment will you accept that as an answer in that case? if you cannot accept an answer in that case, how can you accept this as an answer in this case? for me I'm not a religious person, I'm a cultural person I certainly believe that there are certain aspects of culture that have flown from religion I'm cognizant of that fact, therefore that religion has to be kept alive if those cultural offshoots must continue to live ask any intellectual property lawyer one of the aspects of intellectual property is traditional knowledge traditional medicine traditional farming or whatever you call it how will you have anything traditional if you wipe out tradition? I don't understand nothing that comes from a traditional way of life can be divorced from that way of life and you can't protect it in silos it's not that you separate the active ingredient from the tree it's not possible this is a part of the tree, so it has to live how can this happen? you want to talk about tribal rights you want to talk about tribal rights you want to talk about rights of communities which are artisans and weavers, these are all people that have survived and who have flourished, who have thrived and who have lived because of traditional ways of life weavers have gone out of fashion because they used to be dependent on the temple at some point sculptors have to beg and their traditions are dying because their primary source was sculptures and temples, that's gone flour sellers imagine, you go to any south Indian temple and you'll be amazed at the level of economic activity that surrounds the temple that is how it functions we are absolutely fine dealing with Lakshmi while being in temple we welcome it inside and even outside there are people who survive on it let's be very very real about this wherever there is a lot of footfall, somebody would want to take advantage of it because he thrives on that footfall therefore anybody who is interested in protecting traditional ways of life has an equal interest or must have some kind of a say as far as the survival of the temple is concerned the other question that is also asked is how do you ensure that again temples don't revert to their brahminical hegemonic structure, there are mechanisms in the constitution, there are already enough judgments, there is enough law to prevent that and let's not assume that everything as far as Hindu is concerned revolves only around caste and only around one caste, it's not the case there are enough temples where it's not a brahmin who is the priest, in south India you have a separate community called the Pandaras who are who come from the community of Shaiva Pillais who are supposed to be greater devotees of Lord Shiva than any Brahmin Shaivite sect they don't even need garlic, they are much more militant when it comes to their dietary restrictions than Brahmins therefore let's be clear this is first of all not a Brahminical cause, this is a Hindu cause and there is nothing wrong in it being a Hindu cause two all we lack is the information and the initiative and we as part of our campaign are going to give everyone who is interested the skills or the tools that he needs to challenge these legislations as and when he sees an infraction of the rights of the temple we are going to do this we are going to come out with booklets across the country, we are going to get in touch with lawyers for this, we are going to make sure that everything that is necessary for the purposes of keeping sustained pressure on this particular issue will be done because if this is not done in 2016 we don't need another 10 years, only 5 more years and we will see a chunk of our traditions being wiped out and pushed into extinction and oblivion all it takes at the pace at which things are changing is just a period of 5 years because I think today the definition of a generation is almost 5 to 6 years, that's how it's become so as far as I am concerned we are committed to the cause I know for a fact that gentlemen like Mr. Ramesh and like minded people have invested their heart, soul and their resources into this and we are going to throw our weight behind it we'd welcome any kind of support that we can get from anyone not that this needs too much of a financial support all we need at some point of time is information for us to take action and for people to be alive of their rights and importantly you have enough arguments to speak for yourself as a community in law under the constitution so when somebody asks you a question speak up stand up for yourself stand up for yourself as a community it's not at all wrong we are not asking for anything that comes at the expense of any other community we are not asking for anything that is extra, no special treatment constitutional treatment that's it, thank you questions have you concluded why basically by formatting the Hindu majority state why are we governed by a Hindu majority state how is it that a Hindu majority state has gone on being its own foundation because it's only a Hindu majority state in numbers not in identity that's one two, you just have to read the Shirur Mutt decision and you'll realise the person who created the trouble for the Mathadipati of such an esteemed institution was a Hindu not a non-Hindu we are not talking about a legislature legislature is supposed to happen I mean why we trust a legislature that is a collective injustice that errors will be not stopped because they will balance each other out why is it that this has not happened there is so much of injustice and the supreme court also is adding to it then why is this happening can I give you an honest politically incorrect answer the answer is fractious infighting nature I'll answer the question temples are divided along caste lines there is a problem in the south the Aryan versus Dravidian politics is effectively responsible and single handedly responsible for what temple is there secondly as far as we are concerned I don't think we see ourselves as Hindus first I can't think of any reason as to why from 1954 to 2016 this issue has not been constantly agitated except for the fact that nobody thinks of this cause as his cause I don't think this is a coincidence whatever has happened in so far as this legislation is concerned is reflective and symptomatic of us as a community I'm sorry if you don't agree with the answer but I think there is a serious caste issue as far as this particular issue is concerned please we passed civil legislation about the Hindu court but we didn't do anything about the other communities at that time only the Hindu legislature and even though there were divisions at that time we passed the Hindu court bill we interfered in the personal law of the Hindus at that time we didn't do anything why was the same this thing not raised at that time that is the world view of the Nehruvian socialist what can I say that is the world view of the Nehruvian institution which sees evils only in Hindu institutions which sees scope for reform only in our society and no other society he may have had a majority that doesn't mean that he necessarily identified himself with Hindu ethos that is the question majority of the legislature even opposition by Rajendra Prasad and all those people which stopped the Hindu court bill ok I have a lot of hands going on here Rahul could you please moderate this yes same argument has been said about this Hindu endowment case that the other communities are not ready as of now since once they will be ready gradually then only these laws can be implemented has anybody watched Vajpayee's famous speech with respect to uniform civil code in the Lok Sabha you must watch because he has clearly said aap kab tak in communities ko kehate rahenge ki aap tayyar nahi ho aap kab tak why don't you tell them that start a dialogue within yourselves and get ready because other countries of your faith have chosen to move forward they have chosen to be progressive about this why can't you do this the problem is you choose to pamper certain communities or certain ideologies or certain ways of life for our own electoral reasons this is the reality of Indian politics and Indian society one point addition in that question I think for the first time in 1955 Nehru admitted that he was a Hindu out of crass selfishness he admitted that he was a Hindu and he had a right to do it so that was the thing he admitted in parliament but anyway my question is article 25.2 of the constitution of India explicitly says that the state shall throw open you know institutions of Hindu character and this question stems from the fact that in that it is the asterisk mark that says that it will include Sikhi, Jain and Buddhist and there is a separate provision for them under minorities I mean doesn't this sound a hypocrisy even in the Tamil Nadu we are being divided on lines our own people are minority somewhere and our open people enjoy the majority how come this you will see this happening even in so far as the Hindu legislation is concerned and the Tamil Nadu legislation is concerned where the treatment of Jains, the treatment of Buddhists and the treatment of Sikhs is not exactly at par as far as Hindus are concerned this is the case I agree with you what we have effectively done is that we have also led to a tendency where it would be wrong for you to tell a Sikh that he was a Hindu or he is a Hindu or he is part of the fold that has become wrong, you can't tell this to a Jain thanks to this there have been decisions which are a consequence of this feeling where they have held that Jain is a separate religion all together and is not a part of the Hindu fold also why doesn't the state throw open certain institutions why doesn't it only grabs institutions Constitution says it should throw open, it should not be a grabber like Tirupati temple as far as the question of will is concerned will is a question of mansha, it's a question of intention there has never been an intention to actually bring together the Hindu community caste has to be kept alive at the expense of the Hindu identity and it has worked for the benefit of a lot of people particularly after the Mandal commission report this has been happening for years together this why has only this answer there is no other answer that I think I can actually give Utilizing this provision we can do so many things I agree with you I agree so we can do something I think sir simple question your commitment to republic and your action to release the temples are they at cross purpose so sir how am I putting temples at the expense your commitment to republic is basically taking a minimum 30% and imposing your will on everyone else as long as it happens caste politics will happen because you are taking money from everybody equally then you identify the group that I can bribe effectively and sustain so I think I am not saying that we should not but at the same time this whole temple cannot be done with a single you have to have a multi prong and one side will be to hit the idea of republic which is alien to us it's not part of us it comes from blood it doesn't come from dharma I am very serious I am telling you from when you go and speak I was in Malappuram last week I see I think Srijan and ourselves were in some whatsapp group also you see them it's not this crowd it's not this crowd that is a different India I think we have to start thinking in a different way yes one group should be after this idea of republic idea of India you mean? idea of republic no idea of republic that has its source in the french revolution it is alien to us we have to start from there my view I am sorry if you start with the idea of this republic just to recognize the communities in the first place of their existence there is a clear case of the krishnagiri pundits wanting their influence to be recognized under attack and the yamun krishnagiri state has not been doing that for the last 16 years now they silently are saying we are all for this we should be doing this but that same bloody republic I am sorry to say does not recognize their right does not recognize their existence by denying the existence of their very institutions of worship how is that republic being fair to them you can ask as much you can I am all for that republic republic and equality but if you are doing this discrimination from the very inception I am sorry actually I don't think sir is saying that we must stand for the idea of republic he is only saying that the idea of republic that we have derived from the french revolution needs to be revisited in light of our identities coming to the fore and whether we can reconcile the idea of republic with our individual religious identities I think that's what he is basically pointing to I agree with you there are questions yes first of all I would congratulate you for the initiative that you have taken sir my question is there is so much diversity in the hindu religion the main problem with the hindus is right now suppose for the christians the interpretation of bible of the pope is considered as paramount and whatever he says the entire christian community obliges to that interpretation right fatwa is passed by the muslim cleric is considered paramount for a muslim now in a huge country like us where prior to the coming of the britishers I mean we were individual communities following individual cultures and traditions in various places now suppose a temple like Tirupati it is huge and I mean the its financial capabilities and capacity is huge as compared to other traditions I mean suppose for example a temple in north India they are alien to the traditions of the south correct a temple in west india is alien I get your point now in these situations I mean I am all for the cause of freedom of the hindu temples from the government control but only thing I how can a hindu community address this different interpretations and wouldn't it cause wouldn't it magnify the fractures understood and I will answer the question here is the thing one we must not succumb to this lure of standardization that's very important we are not like that we have never been that way and we should never be that way merely because we think that a certain centralized authority has led to a better functioning of a certain community that is not us that's one, two exactly the state today has actually imposed a uniform structure on diverse traditions that is the problem what you are asking for is what or what you are actually apprehensive of is what the state has done the state has uprooted traditional temple management systems and has said that I will be the big brother for all hindu institutions and let me just there is a fundamental question that needs to be addressed our aim is not to come out with a monolithic structure that is meant to be imposed on all temples uniformly at the expense of traditions, no not at all every sampradaya has a right, every school of thought has its own way of life, has its own way of functioning, all we are trying to say is let them function in a way that they have always functioned as long as it does not result in discrimination or violation of public policy let them revert to their old systems and where you find scope for mischief or if there is mischief have a mechanism to correct it but the moment that mischief is corrected let them revert to their traditional systems that's what we are asking for and importantly we are not trying to create one huge catholic body here for hindus no that's not the goal everybody can do what they want to do so long as certain de minimis basic conditions are satisfied which is do not use the money for purposes other than which the devotees have actually contributed it for or donated to ensure that you invest in the money in fact almost every swamiji I have spoken to on this issue has actually said and they are all for this hindu institutions should stop hoarding money you should not have a profit you should invest in the community spend it back in the community aapke hatme utna hi paisa hona chahiye jo aapke guzara ke liye chahiye that's it not one person I have spoken to has come out with a different opinion this is the consensus therefore and secondly I am not saying that before this particular model was imposed on hindu institutions everything was hunky-dory or there has never been a corruption at all of course there has been you will find so many mangalore christians constantly writing to their diocese saying that the bishop or the padre of a certain church is swindling away lands, is alienating lands I know of that because they have come to me for representation, I know that for a fact goan christians, mangalore christians, they have come to me saying that this is happening when they can have those kind of remedies with respect to corruption in their institutions, we should have similar remedies, that's all I am trying to say so at no point of time will we impose a master structure on anyone and at least that will not be our attempt, if somebody else does it, that's a different issue correct the reason why we have survived all these years despite the ravages of time is because we have not been centralised, if there had been a centralised institution there would have been a domino effect and there would have been no Hinduism Sai, one more thing as far as caste is concerned none of these religious institution acts, be it Bombay Public Trust Act or Tamil Nadu Act or Andhra Act they have no provisions covering that at all there are other CPC or CRPC or whatever powers are there with the collector and all so as far as caste problems are concerned the presence of government in temples is not going to help at all correct it actually only worsens it because then an entity which has a vested interest, if not a valid interest in playing vote bank politics and caste politics is now telling you how that institution is supposed to be run and how do you know that its caste politics is not going to infect and infest that particular institution it will, it will spill over into that institution yes Sai, just help me here I am an absolute layman so you are fighting and there is a group of lawyers fighting this in the supreme court, correct and so do you have to fight battles in Tamil Nadu separately and Andhra Pradesh separately against specific state laws, that's question one and then suppose you were earlier saying that we together need to challenge if we find something like this going on in a temple I mean, do we have to independently fight for each individual particular temple, is that what you are saying or in that particular state one ruling would apply everywhere just help us now I will have to resort to a lawyers answer and for good reason, I will tell you why now in so far as the first question is concerned in this case what is happening as far as Swami Dayanand Saraswati petition is concerned is that three different state legislations are being challenged on similar grounds because they have more or less the same structure, their origin is the same, the source is the same and therefore it was right for us to escalate it to the supreme court directly, you don't need to go anywhere else however if you have problems with the legislation of each state, you can't rush to the supreme court each time, you need to do it before the high court first and strategically it makes sense that if it flies there, we can go up ok, that's one two you will have to broadly separate two different issues abuse of a valid power and the existence of an invalid power abuse of a valid power will have to be dealt with locally and will have to be dealt with within the corrective mechanisms provided within the act existence of an invalid power is a question of constitutionality which only a constitutional court namely the high court of every state can look into therefore while it may sound tedious and while it may sound cumbersome some of these issues will have to be addressed locally and can be addressed only locally, he is an expert at that Mr. Ramesh is an expert at that RTIs getting out information, the worst thing that we don't have today is data use every mechanism available to you legally to push for data and that will automatically open the Pandora's box for further legal action what sort of data? One, data with respect to the original holdings of a certain temple, how many properties does it hold? Second what have you done with those properties and is there transparency in the manner in which those properties have been dealt with there are statutory obligations on executive offices and state machinery to maintain records with respect to expenses on a monthly basis, correct me if I am wrong temple is it? Yes some of the information which we have got under RTI it is very difficult to get from Tamil Nadu government information that and we still haven't got no we have got but for like say the percentage of success will be about 5% you have to go on a first appeal then you have to go on a second appeal to the state information commissioner the state information commissioner is appointed by the government so you know how it works anyway we got enough information like we got audit reports of atleast 50 temples, major temples and we have a question before the supreme court asking for external audit of the institutions of these 3 states see you must remember there is no external audit for the temples in Tamil Nadu whether it gets 20 crore income or 5000 income there is no external audit from 1976 number 1 number 2 from RTI you can really find out how these people's minds think what all they do with the temple money where is the property gone like 1986 Tamil Nadu temples had 5.25 lakh acres of agriculture land right now they say we have 4.75 lakh acres of agriculture land where did the 50,000 acres go and in today's real estate value this 50,000 acres would be like atleast 10,000 crores only Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh has got more lands than Tamil Nadu for temples and under RTI we came to know I will just take one more minute we came to know that there is one temple in south east corner of Tamil Nadu called Vedaranyam temple the temple was actually administered by Sri Lankan Jaffna Tabins because it's only 60 kilometers across the sea they had built for this temple over one century 17,000 acres of land and many of them are salt pans the central government has 2400 acres of the salt pans and they are giving guess how much per acre per annum the central government to the temple rupees 2 also share with them the realization of lease revenue I will just give you an example 29 crore square feet in Delhi you say square yards but they are square feet of sites the sites have the advantage of being within the village unlike agriculture lands or within the town or within the city in Chennai in one side you have a area called boat club road which is the most expensive area in Chennai on the other side there are 305 grounds of land belonging to Kapali Shudra temple as per the official valuation for each ground per month the rental is 3,75,000 but for the 305 grounds government is realizing 3,000 rupees per month you know if you get the 3 lakh per ground per month there need not be any Hindu poor child paying for their education across one mile of the temple that's the guarantee we have denied correct and just to add to this each time you go to the government asking for funds for establishment of Veda schools or anything which is meant for keeping those traditions alive they say this is what you are doing if you wanted to realize the amounts you could have done so in fact sir share with me I missed the point Tamil Nadu government with all these properties 4.75 lakh acres 29 crore square feet of land and the 32,000 buildings they are collecting about 80 crore rupees per annum and to do that they are taking administrative and audit fee about 120 crores that means temples are making a loss of 40 crores where does the 40 crores come from from us the hundi money and the archana ticket money not just that what they are actually collecting is not 100% of the value that is to be realized it's not the entire lease that they are even supposed to get it's a fraction of it it's 1% of what they are supposed to get and here's the thing under section 92 and the erstwhile section 76 of the 1951 legislation 1951 legislation they collect a fee for the services that they provide to the temple you see they are providing the service and they charge for that service they require you to appoint salaried executive officers as part of the particular framework you are supposed to pay salaries this is first of all there is a question of unconstitutionality in this entire thing and second is the sheer incompetence monstrous incompetence criminal inefficiency with funds that belong to this community with resources that belong to this community when this question was brought in the 1954 decision the state says no no this is actually what we collect as a fee it's not a tax it's a fee for our services have you really made good those services and importantly anybody who knows a fair bit of how societies and particularly not for profit societies are administered administration costs are supposed to be kept to the minimum there is a cap usually why because the money is not meant for gratification of the employees state appointees and anybody else or the administrators it is meant for that particular institution and the beneficiaries of the particular institution administrators have become beneficiaries of this particular institution because their administrative costs have no cap and if there is any amount that is ever left in the money that you have collected by way of a fee why is it that you don't invest it right back into the temple on a temple or any Hindu religious institution the obligation is if there is a surplus money that you have you will invest it back into the community or you will put it in the state coffers is the state doing this with respect to the surplus money that is collected from temples honestly you need data and once you have data these people will scamper and run for cover because they don't have answers there have been institutions where he has asked for details of appointment of an executive officer the order itself is missing they don't even have records of the orders for appointment of executive officer these questions are being raised before the supreme court you can also tell how they give money for the pujas pujas no money is given in fact there is something called a dittam that is budget for the pujas where they say for this particular puja of the day how many bananas you will offer they say that and it is usually only two and you actually go to the temple there won't be the two bananas which you will buy in the market reasonably sized and good ones there will be the smallest bananas you can ever find I don't know how it must be specially grown for narrate to them that incident where the priest of the temple is putting his own hard earned money or whatever he has to run the show of the temple see 38000 temples are currently under the Tamil Nadu government of which according to their own data about 34000 temples are earning less than 10,000 rupees per annum which means less than 800 rupees per month which means less than 30 rupees per day so with 30 rupees what can you do you can do one puja you can buy one litre of milk two bananas what about the pujari's some offering, you can't do anything the question is why should a government control a temple where there can be no corruption at all because you have taken these very small temples there is no puja happening and here is one point these people who are fans of redistribution of wealth ideally the rich temples must be in a position to take care of the poor temples if you have excess money and if there is a temple which doesn't have the resources to maintain itself that money should go there because ultimately it's part of the community, at least they can take that call whether they want to do it or not today they can't do this, the consequence being institutions that don't have any kind of popularity or temples that don't have the kind of footfalls, they are suffering, they are languishing in utter disregard they have absolutely nobody to look after them the renovation of temples is another story altogether, how they go about renovating temples, they change the whole look this intervention in religion, all this corruption and all this loss of property we can set it right but where they have destroyed the heritage and antiquity of the temple, it's a total lost cause, I'll just tell you one thing Tamil Nadu because it's being in the southern part it's not subject to much invasions it is the only state in the entire world where you have 400 heritage structures which are more than 1000 years old nowhere else in the world you can see such huge repository of heritage and antiquity, the temple executive officers do not are not even able to recognize the statues and icons stolen from their temples or at least they pretend to Here is the sad part so we have all been reading about the torrential rains in Hyderabad over the last few weeks report after report after channel after channel is constantly wailing about the loss to Charminar as a structure which is barely 400-500 years old what about these temples criminal mismanagement where you completely change the fundamental architecture you don't know how to preserve it the paintings are gone those images foreigners whenever we go to any foreign land we are in awe of their culture we are in awe of their architecture because that is more or less the memory of their past that continues till date most of these nations cannot boast of anything beyond 600 or 800 years we can boast of anything close to 2500 years in terms of heritage at least recorded history in terms of temples some of these temples go back to that and we don't know the value of this we make it a point to go to each and every temple and see Pinky loves Deepu or Sonu loves Monu all of this is written we make fun of all of this if the temple wants to do something about this does it have the resources today and the one which has the resources which is the state does it have the will or the intention to do this I think I'll stop at this so I believe there are rich temple institutions in India as well powerful ones have they come out to fight for themselves because we don't see much of news about and the decision the Andhra Pradesh decision that I was talking about of 1966 was with respect to sorry subsequently there is a Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam decision that is the Tirupati decision itself where they had challenged the 1987 legislation subsequent to the Justice Chalakanda commission report that's the problem and this is thank you, thank you for asking this question I think this is a brilliant point and there is a good reason for this every sampradaya or every mutt is alone in its own fight ok the 1954 decision which effectively rendered the Tamil Nadu legislation unconstitutional was fought by the Shirur mutt alone all the way up when the problems that are faced as a consequence of the decision apply equally to every institution you are always found alone in your fight and that is the problem you can maintain diversity in tradition but at least for the cause you need to come together because what affects the other person will affect you tomorrow therefore as far as these issues are concerned if you believe that a certain mutt let's understand one thing some communities or some sects are small in number therefore their cause sometimes may not even be taken seriously they may not have the kind of voice that some other community has therefore you need to throw your weight behind these sects as a community let them maintain their individuality, originality and diversity in terms of traditions but when they are found in trouble jump to their help, we should at least start doing this now you don't even get to know at least I did not have any clue that this was a problem till 3 months ago no that's the last thing we are going to do there is actually a big problem which is I am speaking to you because suddenly within the last 3-4 months we heard about so much of this and obviously social media helps that social media 2-3 news magazines have changed things absolutely so in that it says that as follows the Hindus are not a denomination section or sect under the constitution they cannot under article 26 claim the fundamental right to maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes to manage their own affairs and matters of religion, to own and acquire movable and immovable property and to administer such property in accordance with law I mean what does no no there is actually a toad for this, a legal toad and we have actually worked it out also this is actually denied 85% of the population denies under article 26 exactly that point 85% of the population you are not eligible for this particular fundamental right that's effectively what they are saying so which is why what we are going to say and this is very clear as far as we are concerned you don't think Hindu community is a religious denomination we are a conglomeration of religious denominations we represent various sampradayas we have representative of each each sampradaya, that's it so therefore you will have to protect the rights of the parts and somehow you will end up protecting the rights of the whole even if you don't wish to, that's the point ok thank you for the wonderful talk brilliant, most of the issues you know that we thought and we did not know so much, we have known today thank you for that I don't have a question but I have more like a suggestion I think the problem is these common causes, people don't come together because they don't know exactly you know what the problem is everybody sees it in a different way for example from my own community the mutt is not willing to invest in any kind of educational institutions because they are worried that you know sometime they will interfere in the activities and there will be a takeover, so that's one of the reasons why they don't want to invest in spite of the fact that they are sitting on horse of money so what I would you know kind of suggest and this should be our initiative if we are taking something to follow up from this forum is to have some kind of an app or at least one website where we put in the parameters and ask them to send their information so that they can upload their documents and keep it in a closed loop by having password or whatever but then have this kind of common questions to be answered nobody knows what questions are to be answered point taken, absolutely, this is valuable and a technical guy has to do it probably we should sit together and frame those questions sir is here, that's what you are working on I run a software company so from within inside my company or from a group of volunteers where do you get this done because in an interconnected world in an interconnected world what we need to probably do is put in more information at one place how will we reach out to these hundreds of thousands of people all over the country that's one question, second is is the software equally acute in Delhi for example or no, or in Himachal or no, that's what we need to find in Himachal recently they have taken over a temple, a large temple we need to you know, make the awareness really reach to everybody I just came on the stage to say two things one is it's now one year and two days since Pujya Swami Dayan Sasuri attained Mahasamadhi he is the divine person who brought all the Sampradayas together so that we can come out as a unified Hindu voice so the case has been filed which is I supporting and three Swamiji's name including Pujya Swami Dayan Sasuri he is no more with us, he is of course the moment he knew he won't be there around for long he summoned me and my friend to his ashram and he told me that you must undertake this case more sincere than you do when I am alive so I am very grateful to Sai for this initiative, I would request all of you to give your names and email id and contacts so that we can start a group right away you know interested people and people who can make a change we started as 6-7 people in Tamil Nadu, today by God's grace we are making a very big change and I am very very positive that we will win, Chidambaram temple was our first victory and that will open the flood gate of Hindu Renaissance I am extremely grateful to Sai, we were looking for a young vibrant lawyer in Delhi who would help us in research and adding value we have two senior advocates who came pro bono for the Chidambaram temple and who are still supporting us but still we need lawyers like Sai, we need you know who will not just read between the lines but between the words as he has done now so thank you so much and hope that we will be all together in this fight which we need to make we have made request to the central government to come as an intervener in this case I am not sure if they will come or not but if they come it will help if any of you can add to that request it will be really good yeah petition through your EMP or LL talking about the case filed by Pujya Swami the Ancestry, the case number is writ petition 476 of 2012 can we find out this information and circulate it to the group if central government comes and explains its stand, if it explains what our denomination is or something like that it is for all religious institutions, when can a religious institution be taken over momentarily and for what purpose so this has to be spelt out by central government then court will listen when someone says something then we as individuals or as Mata Deepathis or as temple trustees go the court really doesn't bother this brings me to another point that Sai you made that there is a question of valid use of power and abuse of power now my question is this is very subjective you might win a case in Tamil Nadu today but tomorrow if that provision still stands, the government can play mischief if public attention moves off agreed so shouldn't we make this into a political like one part of it should be a political movement for an amendment maybe I will just tell you one thing one in battles like this it is wrong to look for a magic bullet or one solution or an eternal solution it won't happen because there is always going to be that one person who wants to turn the tables or who wants to circumvent the law, who wants to take advantage of something there is nothing that you can do you have me on this side, you will have another lawyer on the other side who must be applying his mind equally vigorously or even more to see how could he protect that particular provision how are you going to stop this I would say good looking for a permanent solution is good but I would say the watch word is eternal vigilance there is no running away from this and we need to man up for this, we need to equip ourselves for this, this is very very important and there is one point I want to make here, sorry if this seems like a self-serving advertisement, I don't know, maybe but the point is there are a lot of pieces that have been written with respect to the amount of abuse, the extent of abuse in different institutions since I think December 2015 the one thing that I have been trying to do is to give people credible legal sound arguments that they can use to throw it at someone as opposed to an emotional argument, you screamed emotionally twice you cried, what will happen what will change nothing will happen, nothing will change the only way to do anything about this is to know how the system functions and know how from within and from outside the goal therefore I think I have so far written about 6 parts and in the last 3-4 months I have a professional change of sorts and I have been busy but now we are again getting back on track, I am going to revive the series, I have made the promise to India Facts that series or keep it an ongoing series, to keep writing about this issue till this becomes a national issue we are going to do this, do not underestimate the power of writing, one because I have seen the number of people who have realized that they have credible legal arguments after the series was written and it is that series which actually put me in touch with sir, otherwise I don't think we would have been aware of each other's existence in the first place so my suggestion would be talk, write, speak educate, inform do this as much as possible but please act. But give it a national name, some kind of a brand name so that the movement can be recognized whether it is a temple in North India informal hashtag for Indian temples exactly in Bangalore they have a name Namma Devastana, meaning our temples you should have something like that in Sanskrit or Hindi our temples, something like that so you come up with a name we will take it I think people should have their own not small ones, you cannot have a central one but that's already an organization you shouldn't confuse people you can also do a google search on one article I have written it came in very well there is an article I have written HRNC the rogue department of Tamil Nadu Government you can do a google search you just say Tamil Nadu Government rogue department it will come Swamiji's petition is challenging the Hindu religious endowments act of three states Pondicherry as a state now Andhra Pradesh Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry the most insidious acts controlling Hindu temples there is also one more state Odisha ideally we should have included that but we had absolutely no data no information, no contacts so now they are coming and talking to us so similarly there are instances in other states also so let's start, let's make a beginning Nama Devasthana in a national sense and this will be a great day, this is Mahalaya Amavasya excellent auspicious day so we should start now right now, let's do it I am a lawyer practicing in the Supreme Court he is my colleague in fact I used to draft bills for the private members, for the MPs I have to interrupt him, he is working on the Sabarimala in fact I am a colleague of Sai, I am an educator of record I file cases he might be knowing the definition well my primary job is to file cases in the Supreme Court, apart from that I used to draft bills for the MPs so my suggestion after hearing this talk is I can, from my side I can draft a bill that can be submitted before the Lok Sabha because I have so much contact and I will initiate to one MP that I will draft a bill yes, private members bill because I have been drafted so many bills and this is a very good idea, I never thought of so probably you might be knowing if you take the history of private members bill very handful of bill has been passed but nevertheless I would say that probably we will make an initiative and we will draft it yes because see, I agree with the campaign part I totally agree with the awareness part I totally agree with everything that people come with but ultimately legalizing this particular talk materializing what the concept that he has got and everyone who are in supporting this so I think from my side I promise you, this is wonderful thing that I can also research and I think some people were there who are well versed with that my learned friend will be helping me out so I will be doing something on it no, no, no, this is this will not be a state subject see, I will tell you, we can do it on a larger scale, because Hinduism and other things are all applicable in a constitution I think we can go for a central act this bill will be introduced it has got a central thing not a state one yes yes see, we have a group called central what it was it was suggested you have a white paper first this was the second step that was talked about you start a white paper understand the stakeholders I understand, I have been trying to do this for the last seven years, but the money there is so much, it's very difficult to get I am talking about the economics so all I am trying to say is understand the stakeholders, get a white paper find out how many people are involved in that then the next step will be this because this was suggested in Bricklay Temple and some people agreed there is one, somewhere in Google folder we have a draft white paper probably something like that anyways, we will work on it thank you there is actually I have a friend he is an RTI activist from Odisha so I would like to get you in touch so that the same issue could be taken up in Odisha as well because I mean he has Indian Express has covered his news also and he is actually a fifth year student so it would be interesting to engage him for the Odisha issue as well yeah, I know I am it has a lot to do with peaceful communist statement Mr. Ramesh there are a lot of things that are going on in my mind right now there are certain things I agree with and there are certain things I am finding difficult right now to start thinking about that maybe I would like to share with you you might like to consider that one is that we have to start thinking as a Hindu first not as a caste here I have a slight disagreement why a Hindu first why not an Indian first because the moment you start thinking as a Hindu we will break our country I feel we have to think as Indian first and then as a Hindu okay no, still when we make statements we have to be careful about it second thing is at one stage you talked about Red Bindi Gang chasing us Sabarimala I didn't get your name you are fighting for that case I feel that gender equality is important maybe something is part of our culture but we don't need to agree that everything that is part of our culture is good if we disagree then we must be able to question that I have to answer to this question I have one or two more points please at one stage you said that the topic was being introduced that the government decided to pass for 80% of the population which was and not for test now it might be contrarian but I will request you to be because as a lawyer I am supposed to be open minded unless we discuss these aspects how do I believe or accept when it was being discussed for whom to implement now the normal management philosophy is that Pareto's law 80-20 20% of the profit comes sorry 80% of the profit comes from 20% of your customers if you know that it is Hindu which is the largest population and you want to bring out a reform you have to start with the largest population I mean smaller and smaller and smaller now here are we talking about reforms or I mean do we have a problem with the reforms or do we have a problem with I think he answered that in the sense that if you want to apply a certain law apply to everybody but subsequent discussions went in a different direction and that's why I am raising this explain for the benefit of the audience which specific direction did you think I take the talk to see we started talking about my only request is don't hold back anything and don't search for words be blunt I no no I welcome bluntness because I am equally blunt proceed I was talking about do we have a problem with the state control in Hindu or do we have a problem that state control is not there with Muslims, with Sikhs, with I am happy you asked that question so primarily my coming to my mind understood fine so actually there are three questions that you raised and I have to answer the question of Sabarimala because that's the worst possible example you could have given I am sorry I won't hold back my punches at this point please understand Sabarimala is not a question of culture it's not a question of gender, it's not a question of fashion it's not a question of misogyny it's a question of a certain tradition which has origins which have been contorted distorted and played out in a very different light in public domain every person who talks on this particular issue I just want to ask him one question him or her or her or him in that order please tell me what do you know about the origins of the practice and the reasons for the existence of the practice and the scriptural basis for that practice for you to arrive at this perimetry conclusion that this is a consequence of gender inequality you have thrown the conclusion out first I would want you to retrace your steps and tell me what is it that you know about the practice in order for you to have arrived at that supposedly informed conclusion that is based on misogyny may I request you to repeat the question yes so will you please do this ok I will do this because I have had the opportunity to speak on this on NDTV which is I think the forum on which it should be spoken on and I will answer the question there are two kinds of practices particularly in Kerala where there are certain spaces which are exclusive for females and certain spaces which are exclusive for males and certain spaces which are meant for everyone you want a diversity to be protected then please protect these diverse traditions as well there are temples where men dare not enter and particularly days where streets are vacated of men, men can't even step into those streets because it's meant for women to pray in a manner they want to pray there are deities which specifically are meant only for females this is one thing, two we have to understand that if you want to have this discussion, this discussion cannot start unless and until we take a look at the basis which is the tradition and what is the tradition every temple has a tradition with respect to the mythology it subscribes to, the history that it subscribes to from where the tradition flows in this case the deity of Sabarimala Lord Ayyappa has taken upon himself at least that is the belief the vow of Nayasthika Brahmacharya which means eternal Brahmacharya Nayasthika Brahmacharya is equally a tradition which is observed by a lot of sadhus who are not meant to come in touch with women at all and this is not based on misogyny there could be reciprocal rules with respect to women and their contact with men, it's not something that is entirely directed at women and based on discrimination this is the worst possible myth that somehow these people, the spin masters have managed to put it out in public domain the rules of that school of thought require that you do not come in contact with women who still have reproductive capabilities now they have twisted this entire argument and since we are all adults here, I will have to make this point they have twisted this entire argument to say this is based on your hatred of or your stigma associated with menstruation the argument has gone to that level there are temples in this country which worship the physical process of menstruation the Kamakhya temple who doesn't know this therefore using one particular instance and that too with truncated knowledge of the history of the particular temple to bandy the entire institution and use it as the launch pod for banding the entire community I think needs to stop this is the factual answer I have not brought in emotion here second as part of their analysis the law requires the supreme court to do two things and I have written on this issue specifically I have written on the Sabarimana issue which is why I was called on the debate because I specifically said please don't bring caste and feminism in every discussion because not everything is related to that there are some things which are dehorse that the supreme court has said and this is citing article 16.5 of the constitution with respect to appointment of priest in the Madurai Meenakshi temple saying that respect the Agamas or the scriptures that apply to a temple as long as they are not negatively discriminatory this means that you are entitled to select a few people in terms of ingress and egress on positive attributes but if you say this person of this caste shall not enter this particular place that tradition has no business being in modern India and constitutional India I am with you and if it says no woman can enter that particular place you are right but it has qualified the position it has given an age group and it follows a certain tradition which is based on certain aspects which most people may not even believe in or even if they believe in they would not want to say that they believe in it do we know the tradition of Devaprasna which is actually followed in Sabarimala the tradition is that the chief priest is supposed to be having a dialogue with the deity and people are selected based on several considerations right from horoscope and what not just how Shankaracharya is actually selected for different mats and on the basis of that tradition whatever he conveys as the will of the deity is implemented now I have a question to ask have you seen the popular video of youtube where in a certain mosque they throw children right from the top and somebody is actually catching them at the bottom this continues till date this happens nobody questions that the reaction the original reaction in the Haji Ali case was we don't want to get into this because this is a religious issue it has been implemented while the statement that was made by the board of Haji Ali was that it is a sin for women to come in touch or even be in the proximity of the mosque and the Dargah because it is impure that is the statement that they made ask one representative of the TDB or the Travancore Devaswom board to make the statement they will not make the statement because that is not the truth that is the point here you have an instance where somebody is saying that women are positively dirty and them entering the place of worship is wrong and it defiles the place never has such a statement been made in court with respect to the Ayyappa temple that's point number one so I have answered the question, now what was your second question why did I go towards, I went in a different direction do I have a problem that the state doesn't interfere with Muslims and Christians and interferes only with Hindus you know what, yes and no, I will answer the question straight on, I will take the bull by its horns if you are constantly at let's say if you are constantly witnessing special treatment with respect to one party and you ask yourself this person has the power to equally interfere and presumably reform that person why does he choose to do only with me your so called Pareto principle 80-20 ratio has it been like this for 50 years you should have started on the premise when the Hindu bill was introduced in the 1950s and 60s I say ok that's fine, I will give you the benefit of the doubt as far as your intention is concerned during that era, for 50 years you have not taken any endeavour to do this how is this correct, the proof of your lack of will to interfere with the community is clear in this do you need more than 50 years for this proof yes, no no I am not done yet 3 state control in absolute terms I have a problem with it if it goes beyond constitutional limits simply because regardless of who has what freedom I don't have the freedom to do what I am supposed to be doing under the constitution or what I have the right to do under the constitution you know what is the difference between a fundamental right and a constitutional right all of us actually keep using the word fundamental right very frequently I tell you, fundamental right is fundamental because it is deemed to be in you because you are a human being it is recognized by the constitution it is not granted by the constitution constitutional right is granted by the constitution that is the difference so fundamental right in principle is much more sacrosanct second, it is easier to interfere with a fundamental right than the constitutional right the limitations imposed on fundamental right as part of part 3, you can eviscerate it easily compared to constitutional right at one time it was said that right to property should be made a fundamental right it was a fundamental right originally brought out of fundamental right and made a constitutional right lot of people were happy saying that it is easier to protect property thanks to the fact that it has become a constitutional right as opposed to fundamental right because the state has limited scope to interfere with the constitutional right than the fundamental right, that is one school of thought now one is a question of what I want to do and I want to enjoy my fundamental rights to the maximum extent possible, this is a question that is meant for an internal audience it is not meant that we are not looking outward what is happening to him what is happening to us is the question second, when a person goes through this, human psychology is to look around and say, is this happening to everyone or just me what is wrong in asking this question no no if everybody can talk of sentiments certain sections of sentiments this sentiment and that sentiment, why can't we say that we are equally hurt at the discriminatory treatment that is being meted out to 85% of this population, that limb of the argument I will not shy away from, it is an equally valid argument it is a legal argument, discrimination is based on this discrimination is not just based on exploitation that I suffer alone if I am the only one to suffer exploitation equally I have a problem under the constitution how can a legal logical and constitutional argument be communal in nature, if my argument has no basis in the constitution, you are right but it has a basis in the constitution therefore for me, it is both my freedom in absolute terms and my freedom in relative terms both