This definition indicates that the power to make all decisions, confiscate land, and conduct inquiries under this Draft Act will vest entirely with the Collector or a revenue officer appointed by the State Government. According to Hindu religious tradition, temple lands are donated for purely religious and spiritual purposes. Through this definition, all supreme powers regarding temple lands are concentrated in the hands of the bureaucracy. Revenue officials possess no knowledge of Hindu scriptures, temple rituals, and traditions. In such a scenario, decisions made solely from an administrative perspective can jeopardize the interests of temples, drastically increasing government interference in temple management. This risks fracturing traditions that have been followed since ancient times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Devasthan Inam<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
According to the provisions of this Act, the original draft of this definition is as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(7) \u201cDevasthan Inam\u201d means a grant of a village, portion<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n (a) of a village, or land, or recognition of a grant, whether such grant consists of\u2014<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n (i) the soil of the land, with or without exemption from payment of land revenue, or<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n (ii) assignment of the whole land revenue or a share of such revenue of a village, portion of a village, or land, as the case may be, or<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n (iii) total or partial exemption from payment of land revenue in respect of any land; or<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n (b) a cash allowance or allowance in kind granted by the ruling power of the time for a religious or charitable institution, by whatever name called, and registered as such in the \u201calienation register\u201d maintained under Section 53 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Historically, any grant given for the maintenance of temples in the form of an entire village, a piece of land, soil rights, or exemption from revenue is termed a \u201cDevasthan Inam.\u201d This grant establishes the religious and charitable nature of the property. This definition clarifies the nature of Devasthan Inam only to create a legal foundation to abolish it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the perspective of Hindu law, once a property is dedicated to a deity or for a religious purpose, it becomes the permanent property of the deity i.e. Res Sacrae<\/em>; its core purpose cannot be altered.[1]<\/a> Stripping away this long-standing revenue exemption or land rights will collapse the foundation of the temples’ collective economy, making these institutions, which protect Hindu culture, financially dependent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the provisions of this Draft Act, the original draft of this definition is as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n (8) \u201cDevasthan\u201d means the religious or charitable institution for which a Devasthan Inam is held; whether such Inam is registered in the relevant revenue records actually in the name of such institution or in the name of any person in possession or managing such institution;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n A \u201cDevasthan\u201d means the religious institution for which the Inam was given. Even if the name of a manager, priest, or occupant is recorded in the revenue records, the original ownership is deemed to belong to the Devasthan. While this definition appears favorable to temples on the surface, when read in conjunction with other sections of this Draft Act, particularly Sections 4 and 5, it becomes a tool to destroy the collective property of Hindus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The revenue record entries of priests or managers who have protected temple lands for generations will be rendered ineffective by this definition. Using this definition as a pretext, the government will first declare the land as Devasthan property, and subsequently, under the succeeding sections of this draft Act, grant that land to individual cultivators, declaring them as Occupant Class-1, or seize it directly under the guise of ceiling limits. Consequently, by denying the rights of the priests, the collective wealth of the temple will ultimately be fragmented. The Supreme Court has stated in several cases that the manager’s name is entered merely to represent the deity.[2]<\/a> However, there is a strong apprehension that this provision of the draft Devasthan Act will be used to seize the deity’s property rather than protect it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the provisions of this Draft Act, the original draft of this definition is as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n (9) \u201cDevasthan Inam Land\u201d means a village, portion of a village, or land held under a Devasthan Inam; provided that it shall not include any property falling under the \u201cHyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954\u201d, the \u201cHyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952\u201d, and the \u201cWaqf Act, 1995\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Devasthan Inam land refers to the land received as a grant, from which lands falling under the Waqf Act have been completely excluded. Furthermore, lands governed by the Hyderabad Abolition of Inams and Cash Grants Act, 1954, and the Hyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952, have also been exempted from this new draft law. This constitutes a direct violation of Articles 14, 25, 26, and 300A of the Indian Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Article 14 guarantees the right to equality to the Hindu community. Two different standards of justice are being applied to religious lands within the same state. While the draft law protects non-Hindu religious lands, the rights to Hindu Devasthan lands are being stripped away. This is blatant class discrimination and violates the constitutional principle of equality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Articles 25 and 26 collectively grant Hindus religious freedom and the right to manage their institutions. The constitutional right of the Hindu community to manage its religious institutions and preserve its properties is severely restricted by this definition. Courts have explicitly clarified that if property rights are stripped away, religious freedom becomes meaningless.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Article 300A guarantees the right to property to every individual and institution. The property of any institution or deity cannot be taken away through the discriminatory and exceptional application of legal processes.[4]<\/a> The dismantling of Hindu deities’ property in this manner violates the legal protection guaranteed under Article 300A.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the provisions of this Act, the original draft of this definition is as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n (10) \u201cEconomic Holding\u201d means the ceiling limit on land holding as prescribed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n According to tenancy laws, an \u201cEconomic Holding\u201d is the limit of land deemed sufficient for a family\u2019s livelihood. This definition will adversely impact Hindu temples as well as Hindu families who have resided on Devasthan lands for centuries but are now classified as unauthorized holders. According to Section 5 of the draft Act, if land is to be re-granted to an unauthorized holder, it will only be granted up to the limit of an economic holding, and the remaining surplus land will be vested in the government. Imposing human-centric limits on temples is unjust, as temple lands are utilized for the welfare of the entire community. This move will completely break the economic backbone of Hindu temples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [1]<\/a> \u201cHindus Have Been Dedicating Property for Religious and Charitable Purposes\u201d, Law Teacher, Dt. 2.2.2018, available at https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/land-law\/hindus-have-been-dedicating-property-for-religious-and-charitable-purposes-land-law-essay.php#ftn1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/a> Sri Sri Kalimata Debi And Anr. vs Nagendra Nath Chuckerbutty And Ors. [AIR1927CAL244]<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/a> The Commissioner vs Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar Of Sri Shirur Math [1954 AIR 282, 1954 SCR 1005]<\/p>\n\n\n\nDevasthan<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Devasthan Inam Land<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Economic Holding<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/m.media-amazon.com\/images\/I\/51WQ6vTGY-L.jpg\")
\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n