The Centre has told the Supreme Court that it does not favour government control over temples, even though state‑regulated bodies currently administer thousands of Hindu temples across India. During a nine‑judge bench hearing on the “faith vs fundamental rights” debate, Attorney General Tushar Mehta clarified that the Centre’s earlier statements about the state’s power over religious institutions were only a constitutional interpretation of Articles 25 and 26, not a political desire to manage temples.
Mehta emphasised that Article 25(1)(a) empowers the state to regulate the “secular” aspects of religion, such as economic, managerial, and administrative activities, but not to control worship, doctrine, or belief. He asked to be heard again to rebut claims that he had argued the government “wants to control temples,” stressing that the state’s role should be limited to ensuring transparency and preventing misuse of temple property.
The court also asked whether this reasoning applied only to Hindu institutions, and Mehta replied that constitutional interpretation cannot be viewed through any single religious lens and must be seen from the standpoint of an ordinary citizen.
The judgment is being framed in the context of real‑world systems like the Travancore, Cochin, Malabar, Guruvayur, and Koodalmanikyam Devaswom Boards in Kerala, which supervise around 3,000 temples. In Tamil Nadu, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department oversees more than 30,000 temples, while the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Trust in Andhra Pradesh runs the Tirupati Balaji temple.
Uttarakhand’s Chardham Devasthanam Board manages Badrinath and Kedarnath, and Karnataka’s Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Department runs many of its major shrines. The Centre’s clarification signals a push to separate state monitoring of finances and administration from any direct control over ritual and spiritual affairs.
