Holding

The Uttar Pradesh Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983 is constitutionally valid as it regulates secular administration of temple property without infringing the protected religious rights of Shaiva worshippers, who are not a separate denomination.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983, which transferred ownership of the temple and its endowments to the deity and vested management in a Board of Trustees, after allegations of mismanagement and theft. Petitioners, who claimed to be Shaiva devotees and hereditary priests, argued that the Act violated their fundamental rights under Articles 25 and 26 and their right to livelihood under Article 21. The Court held that Shaiva worshippers are not a separate religious denomination but part of the broader Hindu faith, and therefore the Act does not infringe Articles 25 and 26(b) and (d) which protect denominational rights. It distinguished between religious rituals, which the Act protects, and secular administration of temple property, which the State may regulate. The Court further ruled that the abolition of hereditary management rights and regulation of archaka remuneration are valid legislative measures and do not constitute acquisition of property. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, upholding the Act in its entirety.

Issues considered

The Act infringes the petitioners' fundamental rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
Whether Shaiva worshippers constitute a religious denomination entitled to protection under Article 26(b) and (d).
Whether the regulation of temple management and the abolition of hereditary rights violate the right to property and livelihood under Article 21.
Whether the Act’s provisions are ultra vires the Constitution.

Subjects

Religious freedomTemple managementArticles 25 and 26Constitutional lawHindu religious endowmentsDenominational rightsSecular regulationProperty rightsArticle 21

Judgment

A SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATH
TEMPLE, VARANASI AND ORS. ETC.
v..
THE STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

MARCH 14, 1997
B
[K. RAMASWAMY, K. VENKATASW~I AND
G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.)

Constitution of India, 1950 :
c Articles 25 and 26-Right to profess, practise and propagate religion,
and right to m01iage religious affairs-Provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Sri
Kashi Vishwa11ath Temple Ac~ 1983, providi11g for proper a11d better ad- . -
mi11istratio11 of Temple and its e11dowment-Held, not violative of Articles 25
and 26-Administratio11 of properties belo11ging to religious groups or i11Stit11-
D tions are not matters of religio11-Believers of Shiva f onn of worship are not
a denominational sect or sectio11 of Hindus but they are Hindus as such,
entitled to protection under Articles 25 and 26--But not e11t1tled to protection,
in particular, of clauses (b) 011d (d) of Article 26.

E U.P. Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983 : ·.
Ss. 4, 5, 6, 13, 14 and 22--Provisio11s of the Act declari11g that ow11er-
ship of Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple would vest in deity of Sri Kashi
Vishwa11ath a11d administration and govema11ce of the temple 011d its endow-
ment would vest i11 the Board of Trnstees of the Temple--Held, are not
F violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitutio11.
The Temple of Lord Vishwanath at Varanasi, otherwise known as Sri
Adi Visheshwara of Kashi, was until the promulgation of the U.P. Sri
Kashi Vishwanath Temple Ordinance dated January 24, 1983, being
managed by Mahants and Pandas of the Temple. There was mismanage·
G ment of the Temple, and the devotees and pilgrims visiting the temple were
subjected to exploitation. Even the jewellery of Lord Shiva was stolen in
January 1983. The State Government constituted a Committee, which
ret;ommended to the Government to take effective steps for protection and
proper management of the Temple and to provide efficient and proper
H management for orderly visit and prayer by the devotees comirig daily to
1086
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATI-1 TEMPLE"· SfATE 1087

the precincts of the Temple in millions from all over the coimtry and A
abroad. Accordingly, the Ordinance· dated 24.1.1983 was promulgated. The
Government also issued on 28.1.1983 a notification specifying the "ap·
pointed date" under the Ordinance to be 28.1.1983. Thereafter two other
Ordinances were promulgated and, ultimately, the Uttar Pradesh Shri
Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983 was enacted and it was made operative
w.e.f. 28.1.1983 i.e. the 'appointed date' under the first Ordinance. The Act B
provided, i11ter alia, that ownership of the Temple and its endo~ment would
west in the deity of Shri Kashi Vishwanath, the presiding diety of the
Temple; and the management of the Temple an~ the endowment would vest
in the Board of Trustees for Shri Kashi Viswanatb as defined under s. 4(3)
and constituted under s. 6 of the Act. The Board consisted of 8 non-officials C
well versed in the knowledge and experience in Hindu theology, manage·
ment and administration of Temple, 2 local officials and 5 Secretaries to
· the Government of Uttar Pradesh having diverse experience.

Writ petitions were filed before the High Couri, challenging initially
the Ordinance and ultimately the Act, primarily on the ground that the D
Act infringed writ petitioners' fundamental right enshrined in Articles
25(1) and 26(b) of the Constitution. The High Court upheld the validity of
the Act. Aggrieved the writ petitioners filed the present appeals.

It was contended for the appellants that the Temple was a denomina- E
tional temple of Shivaits of which the appellants were members and they
had exclusive right to worship and manage the temple including the right
to perform pooja and ceremonies and to receive offerings made by pilgrims
to Lord Shiva, and the Act infringed their fundamental rights to profess
and practice their religious belief as enshrined in Articles 25 and 26 of the
Constitution; that the Act was violative of their right of livelihood guaran- F
teed by Article 21 of the Constitution; and that the appellants were entitled
to be nominated as members of Board of Trustees of the Temple and
absence of any provision in the Act in that behalf was violative of their
right.
G
Dismissing th·e appeals, this Court

HELD : 1.1. Believers of Shaiva form of worship are not a denomina·
tional sect or section of Hindus but they are Hindus as such. Every Hindu
whether a believer of Shiva form of worship or of Pancharatna form of
worship, has a right to entry into the Hindu Temple and worship the Deity. H
1088 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A Therefore, the Hindu believers of Shiva form of worship are not denomina-
tional worshippers. They are part of Hindu religious form of worship. They
are entitled to the protection under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
However they are not entitled to the protection in particular, of clauses (b)
and (d) of Article 26 as a religious denomination in the matter of manage-
ment, administration and governance· of the temple under the Uttar
B Pradesh Sri Kasbi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983. The Act protects the right
to perform worship, rituals or ceremonies in accordance with established
customs·and practices. The Act, therefore, is nut ultra-vires Articles 25 and
26 of tile Constitution. (1118-E]

C The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. S1i
Lakshmindra Thbtha Swamiar of S1i Shi1Ur Math, (1954] SCR 1005; .77ze
Durgah Committee, Ajmer & Anr. v. Syed Hussain Ali & Ors., [1962] 1 SCR
383; Sri Venkatarama11a Deva/U v. State of Mysore, [1958] SCR 895; Bira
Kishore Deb v. State of 01issa, AIR (1964) SC 1501; S.P. Mittal v. Union of
India, AIR (1983) SC 1, followed.
D
State of Rajastltan v. Sajjanlal Panjawal & Ors., [1974] 1 SCC 500,
referred to.

Bramcha1i Sidheswar Slzai & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.,
[1995] 4 sec 646, held inapplicable.
E
. by P. Ramanatha Iyer (1987), Reprint Edn. p. 3I5,
Law· Lexica11
' '

referred to.

1.2. Artide 26 of the Constitution does not create rights in any
denomination. or a section which it never had. It merely safeguards and
F guarantees the continuance of a rightwbicb such denomination or the
section had. Ir'the denomination never bad the right to manage property in
favour of a denominational institution as per reasonable terms 011 which
the endowment was created, it cannot be had to have it. It bad not acquired
the said right as a result of Article 26 and that the practice and the custom
G prevailing in that behalr which obviously is consistent with the terms of the
endowment should not be ignored. The Act cannot be treated as illegal, and
the claim that administration and management should be given to the
denomination is inconsistent with Article 26. [1110-G-H, 1111-A)

1.3. Tbe·right to establish and maintain institutions for religious
H and charitable purposes or to administer property or such institutions in
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATII TEMPLE I'. STATE 1089

accordance with law was protected only in respect of such religious A
denomination or any section thereof which appe·ars to extend help equally
to all and religious practice peculiar to such small or specified group or
section thereof as part of the main religion from which they got separated.
The denominational Sects are also bound by the constitutional goals, and
they too are required to abide by law. [1113-G-HJ.
B
2.1. In all Jyotirlingas in the country, pooja is perforined by the
devotee himself touching the Linga. By custom and usages Lokik Param-
para i.e. popular people's belief of performing pooja by touching the Linga,
being timeless usage of Hindu Dharma, besides being flexible enough to
be moulded and adopted according. to changing times, is being followed. C
;\ccordingly, the pooja Puddhutti at the Visheshwara Temple is being

- followed as part of the great and universal traditions of Hinduism and
every devotee is entitled to enter into Garba Griha, i.e. sanctum sanctp111.m
and himself/herself perform pooja (ceremonies) and no one is restricted
or barred of the same. [1107-E·H]
D
2.2 It is seen from mythological literature that Lord Sri Viswdnath
is swayam blmva (self incarnated). The legislature has. stepped in to
prevent misuse, mismanagement and irreligious acts, actions and con·
duct. In view of the.national importance of Lord ~ri Visheshwara Temple
and the belief and faith every Hind~ has in the presiding deity Lord Shiva E
as well as in other deities installed therein, the legislative object of proper,
efficient, effective and sustained management. of the Temple/endowments

- and of the Funds of the Temple, constantly requires to be effectuated and
ensured. The object of the Act. is only to. ensure efficient and effective
performance of the duties of services, conduct of worship, daily or peri-
odical, general or special ritual services, ceremonies and other religious F
observances in accordance with the Hindu sastras, customs and practices
by the archakas; and equally to provide hygienic conditions, proper stand-
ard of cleanli~ess, s.anitation, maintena~ce of, morality, public order and
healthy atmosphere; to provide benefit to the pilgrims and worshippers of
accommodation, sanitary conditions therein, proper arrangement and G
facilities for worship, performance of pooja by pilgrims and worshippers.
[1120-B·CJ
"Kaslii Ka ltihas" by Moti Chandra, page 190; "Tirthalisetus" by
Narayan Bhatta (16th Century); "Ti1tha Chi11tamani" by Vaachaspati Mishra
(1460); "Tirtha Prakash" by Mitra Mishra; "P11ra11ic Mahatmya" and "Tirlha H
1090 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 2 S.C.R.

A Vivechana Kanda" by Pt. Lakshmi Dhara (12th Century); "Dasha
Kumarachaiita" by Dandini (6th Century); Ska11d Purana, referred to.

2.3. The protection of Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution is not
limited to matters of doctrine. They extend also to acts done in furtherance
of religion and, therefore, they contain a guarantee for rituals and obser·
B vances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are integral part of the
religion. Practice of religious faith according to tenets of Hindu religion,
custom and usage stands protected under the Act. The State is required
under the Act to protect the religious practices of Hindu forms of worship
of Lord Vishwanath, be it in any form, in accordance with Hindu Shastras
C and the customs or usage obtained in the temple. It is not restricted to any
particular denomination or sect. [1116-G, 1118-D]

Bhuri Nath & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., JT (1997) 1
SC 546, relied on. ·

D 2.4. The Act does not invest the Government with any power to
interfere with the religious part of management or day-to-day administra·
tion of the Temple or its endowments. By virtue of ss. 14 and 22, the Act
ensures and enjoins the Board of Trustees for Sri Kashi Vishwanath, the
Executive Committee and the Chief Executive Officer assisted by all the
E stalT, to ensure due and proper performance of worship, services, rituals
and ceremonies, daily or periodical, general or special, of Sri Kashi
Vishwanath and other deities in the Te1i1ple in accordance with Hindu
Shastras, scriptures and usage by the priests as envisaged by s. 23. The
Board, Executive Committee or the Chief Executive Officer or any of the
Officers are prohibited from interfering with the performance of religious ..
F services or ceremonies etc. [1118-A-B]

3.1. However, the right to religion guaranteed by Articles 25 and 26
is not absolute or unfettered right to propagate religion, but is subject to
legislation by the State limiting or regulating every non-religious activity.
G . The right to observe and practice rituals aud right to manage in matters
--
of religion are protected under these Articles. But right to manage the
Temple or endowment is not integral to religion or religious practice or
religion as such which is amenable to statutory control. These secular
activities are subject to State regulation. [1117-D]

H 3.2. Administration in properties belonging to the religious groups
SRI ADI VI~HESHW ARA OF KASH! VISHW ANATH TEMPLE v. STATE 1091

or institution are not matters of religion, to which Article 25 or 26 gets A
attracted. Article 26 does l10t protect the right to management; and they
are not entitled to "the management. (1122-G]

3.3. The Act itself has demarcated and drawn distinction between the
religious arid the secular part of the activities in the Temple; the former
have been· entrusted to the competent priests well-versed in the performah· B '
ces of rituals and ceremonies a·nd services according to· Hindu Shasttas,
customs, usages and practkes as· applicable and. prevailing in the Temple.
The secular functions of administration and management of the Temple,
endowment and the Temple Fund are entrusted to' tlle Board; Executive
Committee and Chief Executive Officer etc., as envisaged ins: 14 of the Act, C
for proper, efficient, honest and truthful administration and mal1ageme11t

- with duty and devotion to serve Lord Visheshwara and the pilgrims and
worshippers. Therefore, the Att 'does not infringe the rights ·conferred
under Articles 26(b) and (d) of the Constitution.
(1123-H, 1124-A? 1109-C,, 1124-H]
D
4.1. The contention that some of. the persons have customary and
hereditary rights as archakas and Mahants, and that the Act extinguishes
their rights and so is violative of Articles 25 and 26(b) and ·(d) of the
Constitution, is untenable and devoid of substance. [1119-B]

A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State ofA.P., [1996] 9 SCC 548; Pan- E
natal Ba11silal Pitti · v. State of A.P,, [1996j 2 SCC 498 and S1i: S1i Sri
Lakshamana Yatendrulu v. Slate of A.P., [1996] 8 SCC 735, referred to.

'Tagore Law Leciittes 011. Hindit Law of religious ii•1d C!wit(lb[e T1ust'
by Justice 11.K. Mukherjee, p. 1, rderred to. F
4.2. Prnperties and eudcl\vments vest in the Deity; Lurd ~Sri Vis·
wanath. The management of the Temple by Mahant/Panda/Archaka is not ·
their property. The Act has· merely changed the management from Pandas
to the Board. Only the right of management in the Pandas has been ei..tin-
guished from the appointed day and placed in the Board for better and
proper management. It is not vested in the State nor the State acquired it
for itself. The affairs of Llird Sri Vishwahath Temple by Pandas/Mahants
have become extinct and the Board has assumed the management.'This
entrustment of management cannot be said to constituted acqnisition of the
property or extinguishment of right to property. [1124-C-D] ·H
1092 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 2 S.C.R.

A A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu v. State of A.P., (1969] 9 SCC 548; Pa11-
11alal Bm1silal Pitti v. State of A.P., [ 1996] 2 SCC 498; Sri Sri Sli Lak-
shama11a Yatell{/ntlu v. State of A.P., (1996] 8 SCC 705and 17iem1al
Krishnan v. Devasan, AIR (1976) Kerala 68, held inapplicable.

4.3. Since the legislature is empowered to enact the law regulating the
B secular aspect of the management of the Temple or the religious institution
or endowment, Panda/Archaka (Priest), by whatever name called, is not an
integral part.of the religion; and he performs all the religious tenets or
ceremonies in a Temple as servant of the Temple. They owe their existence
to an appointment which is terminable on the ground of misconduct or
C unfitness to perf11rm service, rituals/ceremonies in accordance with llindu
Sastras, customs and practices prevailing in the Temple handed down from
centuries. On abolition, the right of the holders of the office or post stands
extinguished. It does not vest in the State but is regulated by the Act. The
need to pay comiJensation does not arise. [1125•E·F]
--
D 4.4. However, by operation of Section 22, archakas or pandas found
eligible to perform religious services (pooja) ete. are regulated and they are
entitled to be considered for appointment and to consequential salary. As
regards qualifications of the Archaka (Priest)/Panda/Pujari or Samar·
chaka of the Temple, there is it deal of unanimity among Dharmashastras
E that they s~ould, illter-alia, atleast have a graduation in relevant subject;
and the process of selection should be undertaken by a committee compris·
Ing a minimum of three renowned scholars. Periodical training and con·
tinning education would improve and augment excellance. [1125-G, 1126-C]

A.S. Naraya11a Deekshitu/11 v. State ofA.P., [1996] 9 SCC 548, referred
p to.

4.5. The right to receive offerings from the pilgrims is not a vested
right de hors the service, but is incidental to the service rendered by the
archaka (priest). Therefore, the regulation of rendering service and
prohibition to receive offerings, though may affect the livelihood of a
G pre-existing archaka, it, being a regulatory measure, is sequal or conse·
quential to the abolition. When the service on customary basis is abolished,
concomitently right to receive offerings given by the pilgrims stand extin·
guished and prohibited and is vested in the deity, Lord Shiva. It is not an
acquisition of Jheir right but it has only incidental and consequential
-
H effect. Rights of persons in service as archakas is not affected; on the other
SRIAD! VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATl!TEMPLEv. STATE 1093

hand, Section 22 of the Act is subject to regulation and extends the right A
to earn livelihood guaranteed by Article 21. [1126-D-F]

5. The Act relates to the individuaUnstitution, namely, Sri Kashi
Vishwanath Temple at Varanasi with particular reference to the mis·
management etc. by the self-same persons. The Comm.ittee.appointed by
the Government had gone into and found the need for the legisl;itive B
interference. As a consequence, it would be difticult to read doW:n S~ction
6 to give any direction to nominate the members .of the family or some of
the appellants as members of the Board. On the other hand, sub-sections
2(k) and 2(1) of Section 6 deal with nomination of eminent Hindu Scholai:s
or local eminent persons having goods knowledge and experie~ce in the C
management and administration of the affairs of the Temple and in
worship, service, rituals .or observance; these persons are therein, made
eligible. U is for the appropriate Government to consider whether or not
any of them would be eligible to be considered for n!Jmination as one of
eight non-official members ~f the Board at the relevant time. Similarly, s.
6 cannot be read down to .. inciude those persons who profess. denomina- D
tional Hindu Shivaites practising as members of the Board. Equally s.
20(1) and s. 20(2) cannot be read down so as to give wider pmvers to
''archaka" defined in s. 4(2), and sections 22(2), 23(2)(b), 24(2) and 25.(8)
cannot be read down so as to confer functional and financial respon-
sibilities on the archaka. [1119-G-H, 1120-A] E
6. The Presiclent of the Board inducted statutorily as a member, is
said to have disclaimed interest ~nd abstained from taking responsibility
or interest in the manag~ment of Lord Sri Visheshwar Temple and endow-
ments thereof and is not taking any part therein. ·In that event, the State
Government would take steps to have s: 6(l)(a) so amended as to' bring F
into Board another eminent .non-ollicial member and foilow the procedure
of election of the President of the Board. [1120-F]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 1013~
1015 of 1987 Etc.
G
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.10.86 of the Allahabacl High
Court in C.M.W.P. Nos. 6916, 6915, and 1792 of 1983.

Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, S.~. Javali, D.V. Sehgal, L.R. Singh, Ms. Vimla
Sinha, Yatish Mohan, Ms. Bin.u Mohla, Ranjit Kumar, Ms. Anu Mohla, Ms: H
1094 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 2 S.C.R.

A Monika Gosain, A.K. Srivastava, R.B. Misra and Sunil Ambwani for the ., .
appearing parties. ·

The .Judgment of the Court was delivered by

B . K.·~NiWAMY, J. These five appeals by special leave arise from
the Division Bench Judb'lllent of the Allahabad High Court, made on
October 28, 1986 in C.~. Writ Petition No. 1244 of 1984 and batch. The
primary question is as to the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Sri
Kashi Vi.shwanath Temple Act, 1983 (U.P. Act No. 29/83) (for short, the
"Act"), made for ·the management of the Temple of renowned Lord Vish-
C wanath, otherwise known as Sri Adi Visheshwara of Kashi. By and large,
every Hindu b~lieves that without a visit to Kashi for bath in the river
Ganges and prayer offered t~ Lord Shiva, life is incomplete and meaning-
less and every endeavour is made to visit Kashi at least once in life. The
idol of Lord Shiva at Varanasi on the bank of holy river Ganges is one of
D the five jyotir lingas ..in India believed to be self- incarnated (swayam
bhuva); other fo~r, viz., (1) Rameshwaram .in Tamil Nadu State;. (2)
Srisaila~ on the banks of river Krishna in Andhra Pradesh; (3) D~arika
in Gujarat State; and (4) Onkar in Madhya Pradesh on the ba'1k of river
Narmada, are believed to the jyotir Jingas according to Hindu mythology.
Hindus believe that Lord Brahma is th.e Creator, Lord Vishnu is the
E Protector and Lord Shiva is the Destroyer of evils and wicked. Lord Shiva
is the Commonman's God a;1d it is believed that He is easily accessible by
fervent ,prayer and (ulfils the prayers of devotees. Though there are several
stories on self-inc;arnation of linga (idol) at Vara~asi, the fact remains that
1t 1s very ancient.. For the last one thousand years, Lord Vish-
F wanat.h/Visheshw!ll"a has been pre- eminent Shiva Linga (idol) at Kashi, the
supreme principal deity. According to the mythological literature, Lord
Avimukteshwara (never forsaken) appears to be the supreme deity in Kashi
since the Gupta ages, i.e., 4th century· A.D. till 12th century A.O. Pandit
Lakshmi Ohara of 12th century in his "Puranic Mahatmya" and ''Tirtha
Vivechana Kanda" and Dandini, the great Sanskrit Scholar (6th century)
G in his "Dasha Kumaracharita" refer to this aspect of the matter. Mitra
.. •· Mishra in his book "Tirtha Praksh" has also stated that Lord Visheshwara
and Lord Avimukteshwara appear to be separately located as is spoken in
"Linga Purana" quoted by Lakshmi Ohara, The ancient name of Kashi
appears to be "Avimukta". The Linga of Lord Visheshwara appears to have
H been located to north of the sacred well, Jnana Vapi while encircling the
,
.}--

-
SRIAD!VISHESHWARAOFKASHIVISHWANA1HTEMPLE".STATEIK.RAMASWAMY,J.J

temple of Avimukteshwara, the shrines of Dandapani, Taraka and A
1095

Mahakaal all of which are also erected near J nana Vapi and Lord Vishesh-
wara Temple. According to Puranic Mahatmya and Kashi Khanda of the
Skanda Purana, the Jyotirlinga was established by Lord Shiva himself when
he went into exile to the Mount Mandara during the reign of the legendary
King Divodasa. Since Lord Shiva himself disguised the Linga, according to B
Mahatmya Lord Shiva never really left the sacrosanct and sacred Temple.
Hence, it became "Avimukta" (Never Foresaken). This was also stated by
Vaachaspati Mishra in his famous Puranic work "Tirtha Chintamani" In
1460 wherein he had stated that "Visheshwara" and "Avimukteshwara" were
merely two names for the same Jyotirlinga. Narayan Bhatta had similarly
mentioned it to be so in 16th century in his work"'Tirthalisetu". According C
to the literature, by 13th to 14th century A.D. and especially, dated 1325
A.D. the Temple called Padameshvara was existing as per "KashtKa Itihas"
page 190 written by Moti Chandra. As stated earlier, .in due course,
Jyotirlinga in this name of Lord Visheshwara gained popularity and
Avimukteshwara Linga was installed in a corner of the temple. Every D
Hindu believes that Lord Shiva is a common man worshipper and perhaps
for that belief Linga of Lord Sri Visheshwara became famous. In the year
1193 A.D., when one of the Lieutenants of Mohd. Gori, namely, Kutubud-
din Eibak completely destroyed Lord Shiva's Temple, the Priest (Mahant)
concealed the Idol of Lord _Yishwanath from being defiled and destroyed.
The temple construction was undertaken in .a big way in 1585 by Raja E
Todar Mal, the Finance Minister of Akbar the great, the Mughal Emperor
who was then Governor of Jaunpur. The Temple was constructed accord-
ingly on a large scale consisting of Central Sanctum (Garba Griha) smf
rounded by eight mandapas or pavilions. Aurangzeb again destroyed the
Temple of Lord Shiva in 1669 A.D. when again the then Priest (Mahant)
removed the idol of Lord Shiva so as to prevent it from being defiled and
F,.'
destroyed. Thereafter, it was again restored in the year 1777 AD., by Rani
Ahilya Bai Holkar of M.P. who had built the present Temple and installed
the present deity. Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1859 A.D. had renovated it,
covering the dom with gold plates weighing 22 tons of gold. ·
G
Though it is claimed that .some of the appellants. are the descendants
of Pt. Visheshwar Dayal Tiwari and that the Mahant (Priest) of the Temple
got it re-erected, it is not necessary for the purpose of this case to dwell
on the history. Suffice it to state that the management of Temple was in. an
appalling condition. Devoted pilgrims when they visited the Temples were H
1096 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997]2S.C.R. i
\
A subjected to exploitation at the behest of pandas, the precincts were in
most unhygienic condition. Admittedly, the jewellery of Lord Shiva was
stolen which necessitated constitution of the Committee

B
which had· gone into and recommended to the Government to take steps
for proper management thereof. The theft that took place in the mid-night
of January 4-5, 1983, 14 years from now, had become cause of concern to
all the Hindus and the residents of Varanasi, in particular for protection
-
and proper management of the temple. It became necessary lo take effec-
tive steps to provide efficient administration and proper arrangements for
orderly visit and prayer by the devotees, thronging daily the precincts of
the tempie in millions coming from every nook and corner of the country
C and abroad. On the basis of the. recommendation of the said Committee
dated January 14, 1983 an Ordinance titled "U.P. Shri Kashi Vishwanath
Temple Ordinance, 1983" was promulgated by the Governor of the State
of Uttar Pradesh on January 24, 1983 whereby the management and control
of the said Temple was takeff over from the Mahants and Pandas
D (priests); On January 28, 1983, the Government issued a Notification
specifying the "Appointed Date'' under the Ordinance to be January 28,
1983 and another Ordinance No. 9 of 1983, namely, U.P. Sri Kashi Vish-
wanath temple (Second) Ordinance, 1983 was issued since the first one
was to expire on March 16, 1983 by operation of proviso to Article 213 of
the Constitution. The Government issued al}other Ordinance, viz., Or-
E dinance No. 20/83 on April 27, 1983, which was replaced by the Act of
Parliament. The appellants, though initially challenged the Ordinance,
pending 'proceedings, the U.P. Act No. 29/1983 came into force after
receiving the assent of the President on October 12, 1983 and was notified
in the State Gazette on October 13, 1983.
F
·By operation of sub-section (2) of Section 1, the Act came into
force w.e.f. January 28, 1983, i.e., on the 'appointed date' under the first
Ordinance. Before the High Court, the Act was assailed by filing a writ
petition, primarily on the ground that it infringes the appellants' fundamen-
tal rights enshrined in Articles 25(1) and 26(b) and (d) of the Constitution.
G One of the learned Judges of the Bench had held that though the Temple
..
fof Sri Kashi Vishwanath was and is a public Temple of common people,
the presiding deity, i.e., Lord Vishwanath is the Lord of all. It is a
coriimcinman's Temple but it is a denominational Temple of Shivaites of
Hindu community. Another learned Judge held that it is not .a denomina-
H tional one. However, both the learned judges held that the Legislature was -
).-- SRI ADIVISHESBWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATH TEMPLEv. STATE(K. RAMASWAMY.JI 1097

competent to enact the law for management of the Temple along with its A
properties. The learned Judges gave directions to consider taking in some
of lhe representatives of the appellants as members of the Board; they gave
other directions which we would consider at the appropriate places while
dealing with questions separately. The appellants feeling aggrieved by the
decisions of the High Court, have filed the present appeals. The learned
counsel on both sides have filed written arguments, pursuant to this Court's B
direction dated December 13, 1991. After a considerable time having been
taken while matter was before different Benches, it ultimately came up
before this Bench and has been heard at length.

Sri Rajeev Dhavan, learned senior counsel, contended that Lord C
Shiva Temple is a denominational Temple of shivaites of which the appel-
lants are the members. They have their exclusive right to worship and to
manage the Temple including the right to receive offerings given by the
·pilgrims to Lord Shiva, to perform pooja (rituals) and ceremonies in
accordance with prevailing customs and usage in the Temple handed
down from centuries. The Act interdicts to exercise that right and interfere D
with those rights which are part of their religion. The Act prevents them
from managing the Temple and its properties which interferes with their
right to profess and practise any religious belief offending Articles 25 and
. 26 of the Constitution.
E
We find no force in the contention. The preamble of the Act in
unequivocal language, manifests its intention that the Act is to provide "for
the proper and better administration of Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple at
Varanasi and its endowment and for matters connected therewith or
- incidental thereto". Sub-section (2) of Section 1 gives overriding effect to
the Act. It envisages that the Act "shall have effect, notwithstanding F
anything to lhe contrary contained in any other law for the time being in
force or customs or use, contract, deed or engagement, judgment, decree
or order uf any court or scheme of management settled by any court".

. Section 5 declares that ownership of the Temple and its endowment G
shall vest in the deity of Sri Kashi Vishwanath. "Temple" has been defined
under Section 4(9) which reads as under :

"'Temple' means the Temple of Adi Vishweshwar, popularly
known as Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple, situated in the City of
Varanasi which is used as a place of public religious worship, and H
1098 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R. i
A dedicated lo or for the benefit of or used as of right by the Hindus,
as a place of public religious worship of the Jyotirlinga and includes
all subordinate Temples, Shrines, sub-shrines and the ashthan of
all other images and deities, mandaps, wells, tanks and other
necessary structures and land appurtenant thereto and additions
which may be made thereto after the appointed date.
B
'
"Endowment" has been defined by Section 4(5) which reads as
under:

'"Endowment' means all properties movable or immovable,
c belonging to or given or endowed for the support or maintenance
or improvement of the Temple or for the performance of any
worship, service, ritual, ceremony or other religious observance in
the Temple or any charity connected therewith and includes the
idols installed therein, the premises of the Temple and gifts of

D
property made or intended to be made for the Temple or the ,
deities installed therein to any one within the precincts of the
TC(mple."

"Temple Fund" had been defined under Section 4(10) to mean the
temple constituted under Section 23 of the Act. Chapter IV deals with
E "Property and Accounts". Section 23(1) postulates that there shall be
constituted a Fund to be called "Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Fund" which
· shali be vested in and administered by the Board and shall consist of the
following,. namely ·

. "(a) the income derived from the movable and immovable proper-
F · ties of the Temple;
·-.:

(h) the religious offerings made or intended to be made to the
deity of Sri Kashi Vishwanath or any other deity in the Temple;

(c) any contribution by the State Government either by way of
G
. . grant or by way of loan;

(d) any donation or charity made by a person in or for the Temple;

(e) any other gift or contribution made by the public, or local
H authorities or ins.titutions;
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATH TllMPLE v. SfATE (K. RAMAl>"'WAMY, J.j · 1099

(t) all fines and penalties imposed under the Act; A
(g) all recoveries made under the Act."

Thus the. totality of the endowment and the Temple Fund vest in the
Deity, Sri Kashi Vishwanath. Its management is entrusted to the Board of
Trustees (for short, the 'Board'). B
Section 4(3) defines "Board" to mean the "Board of Trustees" con-
stituted under Section 6. Sub-section (l) of Section 6 postulates that with
· effect from the appointed date, the administration and governance of the
Temple and its endowments shall vest in a Board called "The Board of
Trustees for Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple". It shall consists of the mem- C
hers specified is sub-section (2), namely :

"(a) Dr. Vibhuti Narain Singh who shall also be the President of
the Board;

(b) Sri Jagadguru Sankaracharya of Sringeri; D
(c) Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Depart-
ment .of Cultural Affairs - ex officio;

(d) Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Depart-
ment of Finance - ex officio; ·E

(e) Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Depart-
ment of Harijan and Social Welfare - ex officio;

(t) Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Judi-
cial/Legislative Department by rotation in such manner as may be F
prescribed - ex officio;

(g) Director of. Cultural Affairs, Uttar Pradesh - ex officio;

(h) Commissioner, Varanasi Division - ex officio;
G
(i) District Magistrate, Varanasi - ex ot/icio;

G) Vice-Chancellor, Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya
Varanasi - ex officio;

(k) Two local eminent persons having good knowledge and ex- H
1100 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 2 S.C.R. .'1
A perience in the management and administration of the< affairs of
the Temple and any worship, service, ritual or religious observance
made therein to be nominated by the State Government;

(I) Three eminent Hindu scholars well-versed in Hindu theology,
to be nominated by the State Government."
B
Sub-sections {3) to (5) provide as under :

"(3) Where a member. of the Board cannot perform his duties as
such by reason of the fact that he is not a Hindu, the person
available next below him in. this behalf shall be a member of the
C Board for the time being..

(4) The Board shall be a body corporate having perpetual succes-
sion and may sue or be sued by the name aforesaid.

(5) The constitution of the Board and every change therein shall
D be notified by the State government."

Thus, the Board consists of 8 non-officials well versed in the
knowledge and experience in Hindu theology, management and ad-
ministration of the Temple, two local officials and five Secretaries have
E diverse experience. All these men of wisdom and experience are imbued
to infuse in proper, efficient and honest administration and management
of the Temple. endowment and the Temple Fund, the property of the Deity
Lord Vishwanath.

It would, thus, be seen that the ownership of the Temple and its
p endoWment shall vest in the deity of Sri KashiVishwanath, the presiding
deity of the Temple. The management of Temple and the endowment shall
vest in the Board to cater to the welfare of the pilgrims, proper and better
management of the performance of daily and periodical ceremonies and
rituals. By operation of sub- section (4) of Section 6, the Board shall be a
body corporate having perpetual succession and it may sue and be sued in
G the name of the Board. The term of the office of the Board as specified
in Section 7, is 3 years from the date of the notification of the nomination
and some of the members mentioned in the proviso specified in Clauses
(a) and (b) of sub-section (2) shall be life members, Other members are
liable to be removed by operation of sub-section (1) of Section 8 following
H the procegure prescribed in sub-section (2) thereof and the decision of the
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OFKASHIVISHWANATHIBMPLE». STAIB\K. RAMASWAMY,J.f 1101

Government in that behalf is final under sub-section (3) and (shall not be A
liable to be questioned in any Court of law).

By operation of Section 13, the Board shall be entitled to take and
be in possession of the movable and immovable properties, cash, valuables,
jcwelleries, records, documents, material objects and other assets belong-
ing to or forming part of the Temple and its endowments. Every person, B
by operation of sub- section (2), who has possession, custody or control of
any such movable or immovable property, cash, valuable, jewellery, record,
document, material object or other asset, as mentioned in sub- section (1)
shall, subject to all just exceptions, produce and deliver the saine, when
required, under the Act, to the Chief Executive Officer defined in Section C
4(4) to mean the Chief Executive Officer appointed under Section 16.

Chapter III under the caption 'The Temple Establishment', consists
of Sections 16 to 22 and deals in this behalf. Section 16 empowers the State
Government to appoint a Chief Executive Officer for the Temple. His
conditions of service may be determim:d by the State Government from D
time to time under sub-section (2) thereof. The proviso thereto protects
his pre-existing salary and other conditions of service. Section 17(1) enjoins
that the Chief Executive Officer shall be the Principal Executive Officer of
the Temple and, ·subject to the control of the Board, shall be "responsible
for management to the secular affairs of the Temple and its endowments".
Sub-section (2) thereof provides that subject to the provisions of the Act E
and rules made thereunder, the chief Executive Officer shall do the follow-
ing duties :

"(a) to carry out the decisions and orders of the Board and the
Executive Committee in accordance with the provisions of this Act; F

(b) to arrange for the proper collection, maintenance and disposal
of the religious offerings in the Temple and to keep a full and
proper account thereof;

(c) lo have custody of and make suitable arrangement for the G
preservation and maintenance of all records, jewelleries, valuables,
moneys, valuable securities and properties of the temple; ·

( d) to record and maintain the minutes. of proceedings of the
Boards. ·H
1102 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 2 S.C.R.

A (e) to call for tenders for works. or supplies and to accepts tenders,
the value of amount whereof does not exceed five tholL~and rupees;

(f) to exercise control over the employees of the Temple and take
appropriate action against them in cases of breach of discipline;

B (g) to do all such things as. may be required for the due perfor-
mance of his dutie& imposed by or under this Act."

Section 18 deals with emergency powers of the Chief Executive

c
Officer. Under sub-section (1) thereof, the Chief Executive Officer may
direct the execution. of any work or the doing of anything which is not
provided for in the budget for the year or which is, in his opinion,
immediately necessary and unavoidable "for the preservation of the Temple
-
or its endowments or for the health, safety or convenience of the pilgrims
or worshipers resorting to the temple or for the due performance of the
worship, service, rituals, ceremonies or observances in the Temple and may
further direct that the expenses of the execution of such work or the doing
D of such thing shall be paid out of the Temple Fund". Under sub-section
(2), he is enjoined to forthwith submit the report in that behalf together
with the statement of the reasons for such action, to the Board and the
Executive Committee. The Board shall take such action, after taking into
account the recommendations of the Executive Committee, as it deems fit.
E
Section 19 deals with constitution of the Executive Committee. Sub-
section (1) !hereof adumbrates that the Executive Committee shall be
subject to the directions of the board or the State Government, and shall
be responsible for the superintendence direction and control of the affairs
of the Temple. Under sub- section (2) thereof, the Executive Committee
F shall consist of the following members, namely -

"(a) Commissioner, Varanasi Division-Chairman;

(b) District Magistrate, Varanasi-Member;

G (c) Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi-Member;

(d) Administrator/Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Mahapalika,
Varanasi-Member;

(e) Members of the Board specified in Section 6(2)G) - Member

'
H e.t officio;
\~
SIU ADIVJSHESHWARAOF KASH! VJSHWANATH TEMPLBv. STATE[K. RAMASWAMY,J.) 1103

(I) Chief Executive Officer - Member-Secretary." A

Sub-section (3) of Section 19 is equally of importance and it is
worth nothing that where as member of.the Executive Committee cannot
perform his duties as such by reason of.the fact that he is not a Hindu,
the person, available next below ·him in this behalf, shall serve on the B
Committee. It has also power under sub-section (4) to co-opt as _mem-
ber, any other suitable person, not more than two in number, for the
discharge of its functions. Under sub- section (5), it shall exercise such
power and perform such functions as ·are conferred on it by or under
the Act or are assigned to it by the Bound. Under Section 20, the Chief
Executive Officer is required to prepare a schedule setting forth the C
designations, grades and duties for persons constituting the· estab-
lishment of the Temple. If any member of the establishment claims any
special right by virtue of a judgment etc., sub- section (2) of Section 20
makes the Chief Executive. Officer responsible to give effect to such
judgment and decree of a court while preparing the schedule. All the D
particulars mentioned and the details specified in the said Schedule
shall be submitted to the Board which is empowered to make any
change or modification and after its approval such persons shall be
entitled to the conditions of employment prescribed therein, the details
whereof are not material. Section· 21 deals with the Temple staff and
their conditions of service. Section 22 deals with appointment" of ar- · E
chakas. It read as under :

"22(1) Every archaka attached to or serving in the temple shall be
responsible for the proper performance and conduct of worship,
service, rituals, ceremonies and other religious observance in the F
Temple and other general or special, daily or periodical services
connected therewith and the Board or the Executive Committee
or the Chief Executive Officer or any other employee of the
Temple shall not interfere with the discharge of the duties by the
archaka as such. '
G
(2) The archaka shall be· entitled to such remuneration for his
services as may be agreed upon between him and the Board and
failing such agreement, as may be determined in accordance with
the rules made in this behalf and shall not be entitled to any other
perquisites or emoluments, save as permitted by or under this Act." H
1104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 2S.C.R.

A Section 24 gives power to the Chief Executive Officer to prepare, within
three months from the appointed date, the scale of expenditure in the Temple
and the amounts which should be allotted to the various objects connected
with the Temple which should be done by .operation of sub-section (2) after
consultation with the archaka and also have "due regards to the requirements
of worship or offerings in connection with the performance of.the general or
B special, daily or periodical services, rituals, ceremonies or other religious
observances according to the usage or otherwise". The proposals referred to
in sub-section (1), viz., scale of expenditure etc. shall be submitted in the
prescribed manner to the Board. Sub-section (4) bears a salutary provision
which envisages that "the Board shall cause the proposal to be published in
C such manner, as may be prescribed, and any person interested may submit his
objections or suggestions within a period of 30 days from the date of publi-
cation". Under sub- section (5), after considering the objections and sugges-
tions, if any, received under sub-section (4), the Board shall pass such orders,
as it thinks fit, on such proposals, having regJrd to the object~ specified in
D sub-section (2) and the financial position of the temple. A copy thereof under
sub-section (6) shall be published in the prescribed manner. Sub-section (7)
gives to the aggrieved person right to appeal against such an order, which lies
to the State Government and the order of the State Government in appeal is
declared to be final. The result of the expenditure under sub-section (5) may
be revised from time to time by operation of sub-section (8) and the
E provisions of sub-sections (1) to (5) of Section 25 shall mutatis Mutan-
dis apply to such revision. By operation of sub-section (9) of Section 24,
the scale of expenditure shall be the first charge on the Temple Fund
and save a~ aforesaid, "shall not be altered". Section 25 deals with prepara-
tion of the budget of the Temple for each year; the details in that respect
are enumerated therein. Section 26 deals with regular accounts to be kept
F
in such form as may be approved by the State Government and they should '
contain such particulars and in such manner as may be prescribed. Under
Section 27, the accounts shall be audited annually. Section 28 provides for
imposition of surcharge for dereliction of duties. Section 29 makes
provisions as to acquisition or transfer of the property of the Temple, as
G to how the property shall be dealt with; the details thereof are not neces-
sary. Section 30 deals with prohibition on borrowing of money. Section 31
regulates entering into and execution of the contracts.

The powers and functions of the Board are detailed in Section .14
H and 15 of the Act which read as under; I
I
SRI ADIVISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISH\VANATH TEMPLE.-. STATEIK. RAMASWAMY, J.J 1105

"14. Subject to the provisions of this Act and any rules made A
thereunder, it shall be the duty of the Board -

(a) to arrange for the due and proper performance of wor-
. ship, service and rituals, daily or periodical, general or
special, of Sri Kashi VishWanath and other deities in the
Temple, ceremonies and other religious observance in B
accordance with the Hindu Shaslras and scriptures and
usage;

(b) to ensure maintenance of public order, health and morality,
including arrangement for lighting, hygienic condition and
proper standard of cle~nliil~ss in the Temple;
c
(c) to ensure the safe custody of funds, cash, valuables jewelleries
and other properties of the Temple;

(d) to make adequate arrangements for the preservation and D
management of the properties and secular affairs of the
Temple;

(e) to ensure that the funds of the endowments are spent accord-
ing to the wishes, so far as may be known or ascertained, of
the doners; E

(t) to provide facilities for the proper performance of worship
by the pilgrims and worshippers;

(g) to make provision for the convenience and medical relief of
pilgrims and worshippers; F

(h) to undertake for the benefit of the pilgrims and worship-
pers -

(i) the construction of buildings for their accommodation;
G
(ii) the construction of sanitary works;

(iii) the improvement of means of communication; .....
-<
'
:(iv} such other matters as may be prescribed; H
1106 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A (i) to make provision for the payment of suitable emoluments to
the salaried staff;

G) to do all such things as may be incidental and conducive to
the efficient management of the affairs of Temple and its
endowments and the convenience of the pilgrims and wor-
B shippers.

15. The Board shall exercise all such powers, as necessary for or
incidental to the performance of its duties and functions under this
Act and in particular shall have power -

c (a) · to fix fees for the performance of any, worship, service, ritual,
ceremony or religious observance in the Temple;

(b) to call for such information and accounts as may, in its
opinion be necessary for satisfying itself that the Temple and
its endowments are properly maintained and administered
D and their funds are duly appropriated for the purposes for
which they exist or were founded;

(c) to prohibit within the premises of the Temple or within such
area belonging to the Temple, as may be specified in this
E behalf -

(i) sale, possession, use or consumption of any intoxicating liquor
or drug;

(ii) sale, possession, preparation or consumption of meal or other
F · food stufs containing meat;

(iii) slaughter, killings, maiming of any animal or bird for any
purpose;

(iv) g~ming with cards; dice, counter, money or other instruments
G of gaming;

( d) to do or direct the doing of such other things as may be
prescribed."

Section 32 deals with power
I
of the State Government to cause
H inspection to be made in the prescribed manner. Section33 gives power to
SRIADIVISHESHWARAOFKASHI VISHWANATHTEMPLEv. SfATE(K. RAMASWAMY,J.] 1107

the State Government to issue directions "not being inconsistent with the A
provisions of this Act" or the rules made thereunder. It shall be the duty
of the Board to comply with such directions. Chapter VI consists of Section
34 and 35 which deal with penalties for contravention of the directions,
the details whereof are not necessary. Chapter VII consists of Sections 36
to 47 under the caption 'Miscellaneous', the details whereof arc not
material for the purpose though they contain integral scheme for effective B
and proper and better management of the Temple and endo\\~nents. From
a broad perspective of the scheme, as explicit from the preamble and the
above-built in operational structure, the object of the Act is to regulate the
management and administration of the Temple and endowments and the
Temple Fund for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. C

According to the religious literature on Pooja Puddhatti in Kashi
Visheshwara, most of the traditional Mantras are in the Paramparagata
(Lokik tradition) so it does not find place in Dharma Shastras. Pooja
Puddhatti as being observed at Kashi Vishcshwara Temple are to be found D
in four Vedas. However, a compilation of these mantras are contained in
Shukla Yajurveda which is a compilation of Yajush Mantras by Rishi
Yajnavalkya. However, there appears to be some controversy as to _whether
the rituals arc to be performed by touching the Linga by the devotee or to
prohibit the worshipper and pooja to be performed by Archaka (Priest) as
per vedic/shastric parampara. In all Jyotirlinga in the country, pooja is E
performed by the devotee himself touching the Linga as a result that
controversy was referred to Kashi Vidvat Parishad (Kashi Council of
Scholars) for resolution of the dispute and to find out whether Lokik
~- Parampara with the tradition of offering prayers to the Linga by touching
the Linga or Shastravat Parampara i.e. according to the Dharam Shastras F
to be followed in performing Pooja to Shiva Linga in Lord Visheshwara
Temple. The Committee recommended Lokik Parampara since it is
believed by the people in popular tradition. Accordingly, by custom and
usages Lokik Pararnpara being timeless usage of Hindu Dharma, besides
being flexible enough to be moulded and adopted according to changing,
Lokik Parampara, i.e., popular people's belief of performing pooja by G
touching the Linga, which is most ancient of times, is being followed. -
Accordingly, the Pooja Puddhatti at the Visheshwara Temple is being
followed as part of the great and universal traditions of Hinduism. Accord-
ingly, every devotee is entitled to enter into Garba Griha, i.e., the Sa11ctu111
sa11ctornm and himself/herself perform pooja (ceremonies) ai1d no one is H
1108 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 2 S.C.R~ -
A restricted or barred of the same. On the issue ,of Prokshana of Lord
Visheshwara by Panchagavya, the committee recommended that it was not
part of the traditional mode of worship of Jyotirlinga and was not required.
His Holiness, the Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam had also
subscribed to the above view and directed that the traditional pooja at
Visheshwara Temple should be commenced with Mangala Vadya and
B pooja in accordance with the Shodashopachara. The present Pooja Pud-
dliatti contains this shodashopachara. .

From this legal and factual backdrop, the question is : whether the ·
appellants have any fun.damental right in the· aforesaid? If so, to what
C extent? By operation of Section 14, clause (a), it shall be the duty of the
Board to arrange for the due and proper performance of worship,• service
and rituals, daily or periodical, general or special, of Sri Kashi Vishwanath
and other deities in the Temple, ceremonies and other religious observan-
ces in accordance with the Hindu Shastras and scriptures and usage. Under
D clause (f), the Board is enjoined to provide facilities for the proper perfor-
mance ofworship by the pilgrims and worshippers and under clause G), to
do all such things as may be incidental and conducive to the effiCient
management of the affairs of the Temple and its endowments and to the
convenience of the pilgrims and worshippers. It would thus be seen that
the Act ensures and enjoins the Board, the Executive Committee and the
E Chief Executive Officer assisted by all the staff, to ensure due and proper
performance of worship, services, rituals and ceremonies, daily or peri-
odical, general or special, of Sri Kashi Vishwanath and other deities in the
Temple in accordance with Hindu Shastra, scriptures and usage. The Act
does not invest the Government with any power to interfere with the
F religious part of management or day-to-day administration of the Temple -!
or its endowments. ··

Under Section 22, every archaka (Priest) attached to or serving in
the Temple should be responsible for the proper performance and conduct
of worship, service, rituals, ceremonies and other religious observances in
G the Temple and other general or' special, daily or periodical services
connected therewith. The Board or the Executive Committee or the Chief
Executive Officer or any other employee of the Temple shall not interfere
,. with the discharge of the religious duties performed by the atchaka as such
ana in such capacity in the performance of ceremonies, rituals services
H being observed in accordance with the' established custom and usage. It
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! V!SHWANATH IBMPLEv. SfAIB[K. RAMM'WAMY,J.] 1109

would, therefore, be seen that the proper performance and conduct of daily A
or periodical, general or special rituals, ceremonies, service etc. to Lord
Sri Vishwanath, the presiding diety of the Temple and other deities in the
Temple is the duty of the priests of the temple and they are required to
perform them in accordances with Hindu Shastras, scriptures and usage.
The Board should ensure their effectuation. The Board, ExeClltive Com-
mittee or the Chief Executive Officer or any of the officers are prohibited B
from interfering with the performance of religious .service~ or ceremonies

--
etc. The Act, thus, demarcates the religious functions and then entrusted
to priests; similarly, the secular functions of administration and manage-
ment of the Temple, endowment and Temple Fund are entrusted to the
Board for proper, efficient, honest, truthful administration and manage- C
ment with piety and devotion to serve Lord Visheshwara and the pilgrims
and worshippers.

The question is : whether Sri Kashi Vishwanath temple is a
denominational Temple and whether the Act interferes with freedom of D
conscience and the right to profess, practice and to propagate· religion
of one's choice and whether the devotees of Lord Vishwanath are
members of religious denomination and shall have the fundamental right
to manage its affairs in the matter of religion guaranteed under Articles
25 and 26 of the Constitution or to administer the properties of t\le
Temple in accordance with law? In the Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha E
Iyer (1987 Reprint Edition) at page 315, the author says that "denomina-
tion" means a class or collection of individuals called by the same name;
a sect; a class of units; a distinctively named church or sect as clergy of

- all denominations. The maxim Dcnominatio est a digniore means
"Denomination is from the more worthy" (Burrill). "Denominatio fieli debet
a digniolibus" another maxim means "denomination should be deduced F
from the more worthy" (Wharton Law Lexican). "Denomine proplio non est
curandum cum in substantia non elTetur. quia nomina mutabilla sunt res
autem immobiles meaning" means "as to the proper name, it is not to be
regarded when one errs not in substance; because names are changeable,
but things are immutable". (Bouvier Law Dictionary; Ame. Encyc.). In The G
Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sli Lakshmindra
T71iltha Swamiar of SJi Shirnr Math,. (1954] SCR 1005, the precise meaning
of the word "denomination" had come up for consideration before the
Constitution Bench. It was held, following the meaning given in Oxford
Dictionery, that the word 'denomination' means a collection of in-
dividuals or class together under the same name a religious group or H
1110 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A body having a common faith and organisation and designated by a distinc-
tive name. On the practices of the Math, the meaning of the connotation
'denomination' in that behalf, it was held that each such sect or special
secl~ who founded by their organiser generally by name be called a
religious denomination as it is designated by distinctive name in many
cases. It is the name of the founder and has common faith and .common
B spiritual organisation. Article 26 contemplates not merely a religious
denomination but also a section thereof. Therefore, it was held that Shimr
Math was a religious denomination entitled to the protection of Article 26.
In 771e Durgah Committee, Ajmer & Am: v. Syed Hussain Ali & Ors., (1962)
1 SCR 383, another Constitution Bench considering the ratio laid in
C Shintr Math's case explained Sri Venkataramana Devaru's case (1958]
SCR 895 and had laid down that the words "religious denomination"
--
under Article 26 of the Constitution must take their colour from the
word religion and if this be so the expression religious denomination
must also specify three conditions, namely it must be (1) a collection of
religious faith, a system of belief which is conducive to the spiritual
D well-being, i.e., a common faith; (2) common organisation; (3) a desig-
nation by a distinctive name. Therein, the endowment to the tomb of
Hazrat Khwaja Moin-ud-din Chishti of Ajmer, under the Khadims Dur-
gah Khwaja Saheb Act, 1955 was challenged by the respondents as
violative of their fundamental rights under Articles 25, 26, 19(1)(f) and
E (g) of the Constitution. This Court had held that Hazrat Moin-ud-din
Chishti tomb was not confined to Muslims alone but belonged to all
communities, i.e., Hindus, Khwaja and Parsics who visit the tomb out of
devotion for the memory of departed soul and it is a large circle of
pilgrims who must be held to be the beneficiary of the endowment made
to the tomb. Considered from that perspective, it was held that the right
F to receive offerings was not affected or prejudiced by the Act, though
they had a right to worship in accordance with their faith. Article 26
--
requires to be carefully scrutinised to extend protection and it must be
confined to such religious practices as are an essential and integral part
of it and no other. The management of the properties was in the hands
G of the officers. Article 26 does not create rights in any denomination or
a section which it never had. It merely safeguards and guarantees the
--
continuance of a right which such denomination or the section had. If
the denomination never had the right to manage property in favour of
a denominational institution as per reasonable terms on which the
endowment was created, it cannot be had to have it. It had not acquired
H the said right as a result of Article 26 and that the practice and the custom
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANAIB IBMPLE,. SfAIB[K. RAMASWAMY,J.] 1111

prevailing in that behalf which obviously is consistent which the terms of A
the endowment should not be ignored. The Act cannot be treated as illegal
and the administration and management should be given to the denomina-
tion. Such a claim is inconsistent with Article 26. In Bramchari Sidheswar
Shai & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors., [1995] 4 SCC 646, the relevant
facts were that the Ramakrishna Mission had established educational
institutions to which approval and affiliation were granted by the Govern- B
ment and the University. The dispute arose as regards the composition of
the Government Body, viz., whether the Governments nominee would be

-- associated on a standard pattern? Ramakrishna Mission claimed "minority''
status being a denomination. In that perspective, this Court while rejected
the claim of the Mission as a minority institution under Article 30(1), . C
upheld its denominational character within the meaning of Article 26( a) of
the Constitution. It was held that it being a denomination was entitled to
administer the educational institutions. Therein, the vires of the statute did
not come up for consideration in the context of the followers of Sri
Ramakrishna who are professing the line of teachings and doctrines of Sri
Ramakrishna. The followers were considered, to be a denominational D
section of the citizens. The ratio therein, therefore, does not apply to the
facts of the present cas·e.

Jn State of Rajasthan v. Sajjanlal Panjawat & Ors., [1974) 1 SCC 500,
Section 52 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act was challenged as ultra vire0
Articles 25 and 26 offending the denominational right to manage their Jain E
Temple properties, namely, by the Jain denomination. The management of
the Temple of Rikhabdevji with its properties, was vested in the rulers of
Udaipur before the Constitution of India came into force. The rights which
the jains or any one of the Jain denomination, namely, Swetamber or
Pitamber or both, have had in the Temple or its management in the F
pre-Constitution period, vested in the State; they cannot claim right to its
management under the Act. Following the ratio in Durgah Committee of

-- Ajmer case, it was held that the right to acquire any property by religious
denomination is different from the right to manage its own affairs in
matters of religion. Latter is a fundamental right which cannot be taken
away by the legislature; the former can be regulated by the law which the G
legislature can validly enact.

The question, therefore relates to only administration of properties
belonging to the religious group or institution. They are not matters of
religion to which Article 25 or 26 gets attracted. Article 26 does not protect H
1112 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 2S.C.R.

A· the right to management and they are not entitled to the management. In
Bira Kishore Deb v. State of 01issa, AIR (1964) SC 1501, another Constitu-
tion Bench had held that Section 6 of Sri Jagannath Temple Act, 1954
extinguishes the hereditary right of the Raja and entrusts secular manage-
ment of the Temple of Lord J agannath at Puri to the Committee of which
-
B he remains the Chairman. TI1e supe1i11tendence of the Temple is not the
property. It carried no beneficial interest or enjoyment of the property with
it. 77ie right was not acquired by the State. Tiie whole of the right to mange
the Temple was extinguished and in its place another body for the pwpose of
administration of the properties to the Temple was created. In other words,
the affairs of the functionary are brought to an end and another functionmy
--
C had come into existence in its place. Such process cannot be said to constitute
the acquisition or extinguishment of office or the vesting of the right in such
persons holding that office (emphasis supplied). In that context, it was
contended that the Act interfered with religious affairs of the Temple
offending Article 19(1) of the Constitution. The contention was rejected.
D The contention that ifis a denominational Temple was also not accepted.
In S.P. Mittal v. Union of India, AIR (1983) SC 1, the Constitution Bench
was to consider whether Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Act was viola-
tive of Article 26 of the Constitution. Considering the speeches and writings
of Sri Aurobindo on religious beliefs, it was held that it was not a religious
denomination. The Act was incidental to the proper administration. It was
E not violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

It' would appear from the judgment of the High Court that the

F
Advocate-General contended that the protection of Article 25 and 26 was
not available to the Hindus as community but as a denominational sect or
section thereof and that Hindus are not denominational section. One of
the learned Judges in that background considered the scope of denomina-
--
.tion and held that Shivaites among Hindus are a denominational section
and that, therefore, they are entitled to the protection of freedom of
conscience and to establish and manage the religious institution or proper-
ties attached .to it. It is well settled law that secularism is the basic feature
G of the Constitution. The Constitution seeks to establish an egalitaria social
order in which any discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sect
or sex alone is violative of equality enshrined in Articles 14, 15 and 16 etc.
of the Constitution. India is a land of multi- religious faiths and majority
arc Hindus; Hinduism is their way of life, belief and faith. Unfortunately,
H they are disintegrated on grounds of castes, sub-castes, sects and sub-sects.
SRIADIVISHESHWARAOFKASHIV!SHWANATIITEMPLEv. STATE[K. RAMA5WAMY,J.J 1113

Unity among them is the clarion call of the Constitution. Unity in diversity A
is the Indian culture and ethos. The tolerance of all religious faiths, respe~t
for each other's religion are our ethos. These pave way and foundation for
integration and national unity and foster respect for each others religion;
religous faith and belief. Integration of Bharat is, thus, its arch. Article
15(2), therefore, lays emphasis in that behalf that no citizen shall, on B
grounds only of religion, race, caste, sect, place of birth or any of them
subjected to any disability, liability, restriction or conditions with respect
to access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, places of public entertain-
ment or the use of wells, tanks, baths and places of public resorts main-
tained wholly or partly out of StatP- fund or dedicated to the use of general
public. Congregation and assimilation of all sections of the society, in C
particular in place of worship generates feeling of amity assured in the
Preamble and fosters fraternity for social cohesion, harmony and integra-
tion. Thus, the Constitution lays seed-bed to integrate the people
transcending from various religious, regional, linguistic, sectional, diver-
sities, castes, sects and/or devisive actions or ads. Integration of all sections D
belonging to different castes sub-castes, sects and sub-sections or people
professing different religious faiths transcending the diversity of religious
beliefs. Apart from communion of the individual with his perceived cosmos
or divinity, the primary aim of all religious faiths is to inculcate the feeling
the oneness among all people to imbibe good of that religion or faith
teaches; to get rid of unfounded or superstitious beliefs and to make a E
person self-disciplined. Every right carries with it the co-~elative duty.
Article 51A of the Constitution enjoins every citizen to abjure violence, to
cultivate the spirit of tolerance, reform and enquiry. In other words,
rational thinking and to distinguish between good and bad; to discard bad
and viciousness and to imbide good and to improve constructive thinking F
faculty. So, all religions arc equally entitled to constitutional protection
under Articles 25 and 26.

The right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and
charitable purposes or to administer property of such institutions in ac-
cordance with law was protected only in respect of such religious G
denomination or any section thereof which appears to extend help equally
to all and religious practice peculiar to such small or specified group or
section thereof as part of the main religion from which they got separated.
The denominational sect is also bound by the constitutional goals and they
too are required to abide by law; they are not above law. Law aims at H
1114 SUPREME COURT REPORTS
~
[1997) 2 S.C.R. ,

A removal of the social ills and evils for social peace, order, stability and
progress in an egalitarian society. In A.S. Narayana Deekslzilulu v. State of
A.P., [1996] 9 SCC 548, a Bench of this Court (to- which one of us, K.
Ramaswamy, .I., was a member) considered in extenso the entire case law
in the context of abolition of the hereditary rights of archakas and

B mathadipatis (trustees) and of the attached right to share in the offerings,
plate collections etc. and appointment of Executive Officer to religious
institution and endowment under AP. Charitable and Hindu Religious
Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short, the "AP. Act"). There
is a difference between secularism and secularisation. Secularisation essen-
tially is a process of decline in religious activity, belief ways of thinking and
c in restructuring the institution. Though secularism is a political ideology
and strictly may not accept any religion as the basis of State action or as
the criterion of dealing with citizens, the Constitution of India seeks to
synthesise religion, religious practice or matters at religion and secularism.
In secularising the matters of religion which are not essentially and integral-
D ly parts of religion, secularism, therefore, consciously denounces all forms
of supernaturalism or superstitious beliefs or actions and acts which are
not essentially or integrally matters of religion or religious belief or faith
or religious practices. In other words, non-religious or anti-religious prac-
tices are antithesis to secularism which seeks to contribute in some degree
E to the process of secularisation of the matters of religion or religious
practices. For instance, untouchability was believed to be a part of Hindu
religious belief. But human rights denounce it and Article 17 of the
Constitution of India abolished it and its practice in any from is a constitu-
tional crime punishable under Civil Rights Protection Act. Article 15(2)
of
and other allied provisions achieve the purpose Article 17.
F
The religious freedom guaranteed by Articles 25 and 26, therefore,
is intended to be a !.,'llide to a community life and ordain every religion to
act according to its cultural and social. demands to establish an egalitarian
social order. Article 25 and 26, thcrcfori.:, strike a balance between the
G rigidity of right to religious belief and faith and their intrinsic restrictions
in matters of religion, religious beliefs and religious practices and guaran-
teed -freedom of conscience to commune with his Cosmos/Creator and
realise his spiritual self. Sometimes, practices religious or secular, are_
inextricably mixed up. This is more particularly so in regard to Hindu
religion because under the provisions of the ancient Smriti, human actions
H from birth to death and most of the individual actions from day-to-day
SRI ADI VISHFSHWARAOFKASHI VISHWANA1HTEMPLE" STATE[K. RAMASWAMY. l.J 1115

are regarded as religious in character in one facet or the other. They A
som~times claim the religious system or sanctuary and seek the clock of
constitutional protection guaranteed by Articlse 25 and 26. One hinges
upoli constitutional religious model and another diametrically more on
traditional point of view. The legitimacy of the true categories is required
to be adjudged strictly within the parameters of the right of the individual
and the legitimacy of the State for social progress, well-being and reforms, B
social intensification and national unity. Law is a tool of social engineering
and an instrument .of social change evolved by a gradual and continuous
process. As Benjamin Cardozo has put it in his Judicial Process, life is not
a logic but experience. History and customs, utility and the accepted
standards of right conduct are the forms which singly or in combination all C
be the progress of law. Which of these forces shall dominate in any case
depends largely upon the comparative importance or value of the social
interest that will be, thereby, imp.aired. There shall be symmetrical develop-
ment with history or custom when history or custom has been the motive
force or the chief one in giving shape to the existing rules and with logic
or philosophy when the motive power has been there. One must get the D
knowledge just as the le1,rislature gets it from experience and study and
reflection in proof from life itself. All secular activities which may be
associated with religion but which do not relate or constitute an essential
part of it may be amenable to State regulations but what constitutes the
essential part of religion may be ascertained primarily from the doctrines E
of that religion itself according to its tenets, historical background and
change in evolved process etc. The concept of essentiality is not itself a
determinative factor. It is one of the circumstances to be considered in
adjudging whether the partic.11lar matters of religion or religious practices
r or belief arc an integral part of the religion. It must be decided whether
the practices or matters arc considered integral by the community itself. F
Though not conclusive, this is also one of the facets to be noticed. The
practice in question is religious in character and whether it could be
regarded as an integral and essential part of the religion and if the court
finds upon evidence adduced before it that it is an integral or essential part
of the religion, Article 25 accords protection to it. Though the performance
of certain duties is part of religion and the person performing the duties G
is also part of the religion or religious faith or matters of religion, it is
required to be carefully examined and considered to decide whether it is
a matter of religion or a secular management by the State. Whether the

r traditional practices are matters of religion or integral and essential part
of the religion and religious practice protected by Article 25 and 26 is the H
1116 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2"S.C.R.

A question? And whether hereditary archaka is an essential and integral part
of the Hindu religion is the crucial question? ·

Justice B.K. Mukherjee in his 'Tagore Law Lectures on Hindu Law
of Religious and Charitable Trust' at p. 1 observed :

B "The popular Hindu religion of modern times is not the same as
a religion of the Vedas though the latter are still held to be the
ultimate source and authority of all those held sacred by Hindus.
In course of its development, the Hindu religion did undergo
several changes, which reacted on the social system and introduced
corresponding changes in the social and religious institution. But
c whatever changes were brought about by time it cannot be disputed
that they were sometimes of a revolutionary character - the fun-
damental, moral and religious ideas of the Hindu which lie at the
same and the system that we see around us can be said to be an
evolutionary product of the spirit and genus of the belief passing
D through different ways of their cultural development."

Hinduism cannot be defined in terms of Polytheism or Henotheism
or Monotheism. The nature of Hindu religion ultimately is Monism/Ad-
vaita. This is in contradistinction to Monotheism which means only one
God to the exclusion of all others. Polytheism is a belief of multiplicity of
E Gods. On the contrary, Monism is a spiritual belief of one Ultimate
Supreme and manifests Himself as many. This multiplicity is not contrary
to on-dualism. This is the reason why Hindus start adoring any Deity either
handed down by tradition or brought by a Guru or Swambhuru and seek
to attain the Ultimate Supreme.
F
The protection of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution is not limited
to matters of doctrine. They extend also to acts done in furtherance of
religion and, therefore, they contain a guarantee for rituals and observan-
ces, ceremonies and modes of worship which are integral parts of the
religion. In Seshammal case on which great reliance was placed and stress
G was laid by counsel on either side, this Court while reiterating the impor-
tance of performing rituals in temples for the idol to sustain the faith of
the people, insisted upon the need for performance of elaborate ritual
ceremonies accompanied by chanting of mantras appropriate to the Deity.

H
This Court also recognised the place of an archaka and had held that the
priest would occupy place of importance in the performance of ceremonial
l
SRI ADI VlSHESHWARA OF KASH! VlSHWANATH IBMPLE v. STAIB (K. RAMASWAMY, J.J 1117

rituals by a qualified archaka who would observe daily discipline imposed A
upon him by the Agamas according to tradition, usage and customs ob-
tained in the temple. Shri P.P. Rao, learned senior Counsel also does not
dispute it. It was held that Articles 25 and 26 deal with and protect religious
freedom. Religion as used in those Articles requires restricted interpreta-
tion in etymological sense. Religion undoubtedly has its basis in a system B
of beliefs which are regarded by those who profess religion to be con-
ducive to the future well-being. It is not merely a doctrine. It has outward
expression in acts as well. It is not every aspect of the religion that requires
protection of Art.ides 25 and 26 nor has the Constitution provided that
every religious activity would not be interfered with. Every mundane and
human activity is not intended to be protected under the Constitution in C
the grab of religion. Articles 25 and 26 mnst be viewed with pragmatism.
By the very nature of things it wonld be extremely difficult, if not impos-
sible, to define the expression "religion" or "matters or religion" or "religious
beliefs or practice". Right to religion guaranteed by Articles 25 and 26 is
not absolute or unfettered right to propagate religion which is subject to
legislation by the State limiting or regulating every non-religious activity.
D
The right to obse.rve and practice rituals and -right to manage in matters of
religion are protected under these Articles. Bnt right to manage the
Temple or endowment is not integral to religion or religious practice or
religion as such which is amenable to statutory control. These secular
activities are subject to State regulation but the religion and religious E
practices which are integral part of religion are protected. It is well settled
law that administration, management and government of the religious
institution or endowment are secular activities and the State could reguiate
them by appropriate legislation. This Court upheld the A.P. Act which
regulated the management of the religious institutions and endowments
F
and abolition of heriditary rights and the right to receive offerings and plate
collections attached to the duty.

It would, therefore, be necessary to consider whether the Act infr-
inges the right of the Hindus who believe in Shaiva form of worship. In
A.S. Narayan Deekshitulu's case (supra) this Court pointed out that in G
matters of performing pooja in Shiva Temple, 28 agamas are applicable
· whereas in Vaishnava Temples Pancharatna agama contain elaborate rules
regulating how the Temple would be constructed, whereat the principal
deity is to be consecrated, whereat the other idols are to be installed and
what would be the place where the worshippers would stand and worship H
1118 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 2 S.C.R. ~
I

A the Deity. Accordingly, in paragraph 5, it was held that to integrate the
people, all people arc entitled to participate in all forms of worship. The
.only prohibition was as to the entry into sanctum sanctomm in which the
Priest would be entitled to enter. The form of worship and absence of
prohibition for devotees to enter the sanctum sanctomm in the temple has
already been pointed out and needs no reiteration.
B
Thus, it could be seen that every Hindu whether a believer of Shaiva ,
form of worship or of Pancharatna form of worship, has a right of entry
into the Hindu Temple and worship the Deity. Therefore, the Hindu
believers ofShaiva form of worship are not denominational worshippers.
C They are part of the Hindu religious form of worship. The Act protects the
right to perform worship, rituals or ceremonies in accordance with estab-
lished custom and practices. Every Hindu has right to enter the Temple,
touch Linga of Lord Sri Vishwanath and himself perform the worship. The
State is required under the Act to protect the religious practices of Hindu
D form of worship of Lord Vishwanath, be it in any form, in accordance with
Hindu Sastras, the customs or usage obtained in the temple. It is not
restricted to any particular denomination or sect. Believers of Shaiva form
of worship are not a denominational sect or section of Hindus but they are
Hindus as such. They are entitled to the protection under Articles 25 and
26 of the Constitution. However, they are not entitled to the protection, in
E particular, of clauses (b) and (d) of Article 26 as a religious denomination
in the matter of management, administration and governance of the
temples under the Act. The Act, therefore, is not ultra vires Articles 25 and
26 of the Constitution.

F It is then contended that abolition of the right to manage the Temple
as Mahant is offensive of their right to religious practice and management
of the Temple. This controversy is no longer res integra. This Court in
Pa1111alal Bansilal Pitti v. State of A.P., [1996] 2 SCC 498, was to decide the
validity of the provisions of the A.P. Act in the matter of abolishing the
right of hereditary trustees and appointment of the Executive Officer and
G non-hereditary trustee. In Sli S1i Sli Lakslwmana Yatendmlu v. State of
A.P., [1996) 8 SCC 705 this Court was to decide the constitutionality of
Sections 50 to 55 of the said AP. Act dealing with action against erring

H
Mathadhipati, maintenance of accounts and removal of Matadhipati for
misconduct and filling up of the resultant vacancies. After elaborate con-
sideration, the provisions were upheld as valid and constitutional. Diverse
-
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KA~HI VISHWANATH TEMPLE v. SfATE [K. RAMA~WAMY, .1. J 1119

provisions of the A.P. Act, 1987 were upheld. We need not reiterate them A
once over and to avoid burdening the judgment, we adopt the reasons given
therein and agree with the same. For the same reasons, the need to
examine in detail aforequoted provisions is obviated. Accordingly, we hold
that the contention that some of the persons have customary and hereditary
rights as archakas and that the Act extingui~hes their rights and so is
violative of Article 25 and 26 (b) and ( d) of the Constitution, is untenable B
and devoid of substance.

Obviously, therefore, it was contended that in the constitution of the
committees or the Board of Trustees the appellants are entitled to be
nominated as members of the Board. The absence of any provision in the C
Act in that behalf is violative of their right to be members of the Board.
The learned Judges of the High Court observed the need to consider their
representation. Sri Javali, learned senior counsel, sought support in that
behalf from Pa1111alal's case and was adopted by Sri Dhavan. The A.P. Act
relates to abolition to hereditary right of the founders of the religious D
institution or endowment or the Board of Trustees. That Act was based
upon the Report of Justice Kondiah Commission and has abolished those
rights. While the validity of the provisions was upheld, the provisions were
read down to indicate that all hereditary trustees need not be painted with
the same brush as having committed misconduct or mismanaged the in-
stitution or endowment. In Pannalal's case, this Court examined the ques- E
tion in detail and held that if in an individual case a hereditary trustee
incurs any disqualification, an enquiry may be conducted and one of the
members of the family of the founder may be appointed as a hereditary
trustee along with non- hereditary trustees and as a Chair-person of the
Board of Trustees so that the institution would be properly maintained and F
rituals and ceremonies conducted as per the custom, usage and practice.
In the present case, Act relates to the individual institution, namely, Sri
Kashi Vishwanath Temple at Varanasi with particular reference to the
mismanagement etc. by the self-same persons. The Committee appointed
by the Government had gone into and found the need for the legislative
interference. As a consequence, it would be difficult to read down Section G
6 to give any direction to nominate the members of the family or some of
the appellants as members of the Board. On the other hand, sub-section
2(k} and 2(1) of Section 6 deal with nomination of eminent Hindu scholars
or local eminent persons having good knowledge and experience in the
management and administration of the affairs of the Temple and in wor- H
1120 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.

A ship, service, rituals or observance these persons are therein, made eligible.
It it for the appropriate Government to consider whether or not any of ·
them would be eligible to be considered for nomination as one of eight
non-official members of the Board at the relevant time.

B It is seen from mythological literature referred to hereinbefore that
Lord Sri Vishwanathis swayam bhuva (self-incarnated). The object of the
Act is only to ensure efficient and effective performance of the duties of
services, conduct of worship, daily or periodical, general or special rituals
services, ceremonies and other religious observances in accordance with
the Hindu Sastras, customs and practices by the archakas and equally to
C provide hygienic conditions, proper standard or cleanliness, sanitation,
maintenance of morality, public order and healthy atmosphere; to provide
benefit to the pilgrims and worshippers of accommodation, sanitary condi-
tions therein, proper arrangement and facilities for worship, performance
of pooja by pilgrims and worshippers. The Board, as seen, is composed of
D 7 officials and 8 non-officials for efficient management of the Temple. Dr.
Vibhuti Narain Singh was statutorily inducted by Section 6(1)(a) as a
member and President of the Board. ';Ne are informed that he had dis-
claimed interest and abstained from taking responsibility or interest in the
management of Lord Sri Visheshwar Temple and endowments thereof and
in not taking any part therein. Since he is not a party to the present
E proceedings, we are not expressing any opinion in that behalf. Suffice it to
state that it would be for the State Government to cause a notice issued to
him seeking whether he is willing to take keen and active interest in the
management and maintenance of the Temple and its endowments as
member and President of the Board. In case he declines to associate
p himself or fails to take part as member and President of the Board, then
it would be needless to mention that the State Government would take
. steps to have Section 6(1)(a) so amended as to bring into the Board
another eminent non-official member and follow the procedure of election
of the President of the Board. In view of the national importance of Lord
Sri Visheshwar Temple and the belief and faith every Hindu has in the
G presiding deity Lord Shiva as well as in other deities installed therein, it is
needless to reiterate that the legislative object of proper, efficient, effective
and sustained management of the Temple/endowments and of the Fund of
the Temple, ·constantly requires to be effectuated and ensured. Equally,
facilities for the pilgrims and worshippers for darshan, performance of
H pooja, rituals, ceremonies etc. require to be· constantly monitored and
SRI ADI VJSHESHWARA OF KASH! VJSHWANAIB TEMPLE'· STATE {K. RAMASWAMY, J.J 1121
J

provided by the Executive Committee or the Chief Executive Officer and A
the staff under the supervision of the Board. Consequently, non-official
members of the Board should, of necessity, be eminent persons having rich
knowledge and experience in the management and administration of the
affairs of the Temple and the performance of service, rituals or religious
observances in the Temple without creating any vested interest. It would
be voluntary service with religious and pious devotion, selfless service to B
the society as responsible member of the society without any distinction of
caste, sect or sub-sect among Hindus.

-- Equally, the Vice-Chancellor under Section 6(1)G) per force is a
person . having good knowledge and perceptions in the aforementioned C
disciplines. Equally, the persons to be nominated under Section 6(1)(1)
must be eminent Hindu scholars well-versed in Hindu theology. The
Government should always take care to ensure that the persons nomination
under Section 6(1)(k) and (1) are those endowed with the above qualifica-
tions, quality devoted to and zeal for active association with proper and D
efficient management of the Temple, its endowments, the Fund and service
to the pilgrims so that the object of the Act would be constantly monitored
and effectively implemented. If any infraction in this behalf is committed
by the State Government in periodical nomination and if any of them does
not fulfil the requirements, that would be a matter for anybody to call in
·question and same and have the same corrected in an appropriate proceed- E
ing.

The further contention of Sri Rajeev Dhavan is that the right of the
denomination to practise their faith and manage their affairs, as guaranteed
by Articles 26(b) and (d), has been eroded and they have been deprived p
of it. The theft of jewellery of Lord Vishwanath is an offemce and a law
and order problem and cannot be made a rouse or a cause to interfere
with religious rights and management of the religious properties. Inter-
ference in that behalf must be proportionate to the need, namely, prevent-
. ing recurrence of thefts or mismanagement by appropriate action by
law-enforcing authorities. Even if there is any mismanagement of the G
properties belonging to the Temple it should be corrected exercising the
poWer either under Section 92 CPC or under appropriate existing provision
in the U.P. Religious Endowments Act. It would, therefore, be clear that
" the Act interferes with religious affairs and management of the properties
attached to the .religious .institution guaranteed by Articles 26(b) and (d). H
1122 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 2 S.C.R.

A He further contended that even if it is found to be necessary, the Act must
be read down giving the appellant the right to manage religious affairs and
the administration of the properties, performance of the ceremonies by the
Pandas (Archakas, priests) so as to preserve the sanctity of the rights of
the worshippers which include, inter alia, the right to management of the
B properties according to long standing usage or <:ustom and to receive
offerings given by the pilgrims. Placement of the management of the
religious affairs and the properties in the hands of a few Hindus will not
satisfy the denominational right of the Hindus. He also contended that
Pandas are not just Shivaites but are like the trustees/Mahants. They are
Archakas as well. They perform pooja/ceremonies etc, which is integral to
---
C the working of the Temple as a religious institution - a spiritual and
temploral fact. of religion - and cannot be relegated to be a secular aetivity.
The Act deprives them of the share of the offerings received by the
Archakas without compensation. As Shivaites,. the Act interfere with their
legitimate right to function as Pandas in their denominational character
D and also deprive them of their right to livelihood protected under Article
21 of the Constitution as it is integral to the management of the Temple.
We find no force in any of the contentions. It is already held that practice
of religious faith acr.:ording to tenets of Hindu religion, custom and usage
stand protected by the Act. But the secular management of the religious
affairs in the Temple is secular part. The "legislature has power to interfere
E with and regulate proper and efficient management thereof. This aspect
of the question has been elaborately considered by a three-Judge Bench to
which two of us (Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.) were members in •
Bhuri Nath & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., JT (1997) 1 SC
546. Therein the controversy related to abolition of Baridars rights to
F perform pooja and to own the properties and abolition thereof by the
Jammu and Kashmir Act of Mata Sri Vaishno Devi in Jammu. Since this
Court elaborately dicussed the reasons in support of its holding, the need
to reiterate them once over is obviated.

The denominational status has already been held to be non- existent
G and Articles 25 and 26 do not protect them. Various regulatory measures
devised under the Act aim only at proper and better management and
administration of the Temple, endowments and all matters incidental to or
connected with the management thereof. The Act itself has drawn a
distinction between religious affairs and secular control. Chief Executive

H
SR!ADIVISHESHWARA OFKASHIVISHWANATHTEMPLE•. STATE[K. RAMASWAMY,J.) 1123

Officer acts under the control and supervision of the Board. The Board, A
Executive Committee and Chief Executive Officer have been entrusted
with the duty tq ensure performance of religious services, rituals,
ceremonies and worships in accordance with the Hindu Sastras, customs
and practice being followed in the Temple etc. The priests are given full
freedom to perform daily or periodical rituals and ceremonies as are in B
vogue. They are responsible for proper performances and conduct of
worship, se!"vice, rituals, ceremonies and other religious observances in the
Temple and other general or special, daily or periodical services connected
therewith. Obviously, the legislature being aware of the power under
Section 92, CPC etc. to frame the scheme, appears to have felt it expedient
in the interest of the institution itself and has taken legislative measure to
c
regulate it, by employing non obstante clause in relevant provisions in the
Act. The legislature, therefore, having undoubted power has stepped in and
made the Act as a permanent measure to prevent mismanagement and to
improve hygienic and sanitary conditions prevailing in the Temple and to D
provide orderly facilities for worship by the pilgrims coming from every
nook and corner of India and abroad as a regular stream of devotees- and
local worshippers. As has already been stated, in Lord Sri Vishwanath
Temple the presiding Deity is the idol (Linga) of Lord Shiva and all other
Deities are situated therein to whom due and regular performance of daily
and periodical rituals and ceremonies and ensured under the Act. The
E
Temple is one of the renowned Temple in hidi<1; the Hindus constantly
keep visiting the Temple throughout the day, week, month and year
uninterruptedly as unbroken chain : the legislature has stepped into
prevent misuse, mismanagement and irreligious· acts, actions and conduct,
to regulate proper and efficient management and administration of the F
Temple, performance of all religious services ceremonies and rituals in a
systematic and organised manner by competent persons on the religious
side of performing ceremonies without any interruption, The Board as-
sisted by the Executive Committee and Chief Executive Officer with the
aid of the establishment arc entrusted with the duty to effectuate the G
efficient management of the Temple, the endowment and proper utilisation
of the Temple Fund and safe custody of the jewellery etc. and proper
management of the properties in the light of the demarcation. The Act
itself has demarcated and drawn distinction between secular part and
religious parts of the activities in the Temple; the former have been ll
1124 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 2 S.C.R.1

A entrusted to the competent priests well-versed in the performance of rituals
and ceremonies and services according to Hindu Sastras, customs, usages
and practices as applicable and prevailing in the Temple. The secular part
has been entrusted to the Board, Executive Committee and chief Executive
Officer etc. appointed as per the Act.

B The Government kept its control only on the secular side as the
Temple is one of the important Hindu Temples in the State of U.P. and in
-Bharat. Properties and endowments vest in the Deity, Lord Sri Vishwanath.
The management of the Temple by Mahant/Panda/Archaka is not their
property. The Act has merely changed the management from Pandas to
C the Board. Only the right of management in the Pandas has been extin-
guished from the appointed day and placed in the Board for better and
proper management. It is not vested in the State nor the State acquired it
for itself. In other words, the affairs of Lord Sri Vishwanath Temple by
Pandas/Mahant have become extinct and the Board has assumed the
-
D management. This .!ntrustment of management cannot be said to constitute
acquisition of the property or extinguishment of right to property. In the
light of the above, there is need to give restrictive interpretation to the word
"religious faith" and "religion" so as to allow the Pandas to manage the
Temple both on temploral part and deny them the secular part of the
E management of the Temple. The ratios laid in Panna Lal's case,
Laxmana11's case and Narayana11's case do not apply to the Act in question.

The management has been entrusted to the Board consisting of
eminent personalities specified in Section 6 of the Act. As seen, seven
officers well experienced in the management and eight non- officials fully
F acquainted with and experienced in the religious part of the religion are
members of the Board. The ratio in 171e11na/ Krisltna11 v. Devasa11, AIR
{1976) Kerala 68 has no application to the facts in this case. Therein, the
constitution of the Committee was found to be inconsistent with the scheme
of management guaranteed by the Constitution and, therefore, it was
G declared to be ultra vires. On the facts of this case, we need not go into the
correctness of those decisions. But in this case, as seen, as clear demarca-
tion came to be made between temporal and secular aspects of the
management of the Temple. The religious management is entrusted to
eminent personalities professing Hindu religion, well-versed in religious
H and administrative facets of management and, therefore, the Act does not
SRIADIVISHESHWARAOFKASHI VISHWANATil'lEMPLBv. SfAIB(K. RAMASWAMY.I) 1125

infringe the rights conferred under Article 26(b) and (d). A

It is then contended that some of the Mahants are prevented from
performing pooja. The appellants had not set up their case that as Pan-
das/Archakas/priests, they were prevented from performing duties in
rendering rituals/ceremonies services etc. They staked their claims as B
Mahants which claims we have negatived. Interim direction was given by
this Court not to prevent them from performing pooja as devotees. There-
fore, that direction is made absolute and they will not be prevented from
performing pooja as devotees. Section 22 takes care of any service being
rendered as archaka (priest). "Archaka" has been defined in Section 4(2) C
to mean any person who performs or conducts any worship, service, rituals
in the Temple and includes a Pujari, if he was doing the same on the
appointed date. By its necessary implication, if any of the appellants is
found to be of good character, possessed of the requisite qualification and
experience etc., he/they may continue as archaka/priest and may be ap-
pointed by the Board. The further contention that it offends their right to D
livelihood guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution is devoid of any
force. In view of the settled legal position that the legislature is empowered
to enact the law regulating the secular aspect of the management of the
Temple or the religious institution or endowment, panda/Archaka (Priest),
by whatever name called, is not integral ·part of the _religion and performs E
all the religious tenets or ceremonies in a Temple a5 servant of the Temple
They owe their existence to an appointment. They are servants of the
Temple terminable on the ground of misconduct or unfitness to perform
service, rituals/ceremonies in accordance with Hindu Sastras, customs and
practices prevailing in the Temple handed down from centuries. On aboli-
F
tion, the right of the holder of the office or post stands extinguished. It
does not vest in the State but is regulated by the Act. The need to pay
compensation does not arise. However, by operation of Section 22, ar-
chakas or a pandas found eligible to perform religious service (pooja) etc.
are regulated and entitled to be considered for appointment and to conse-
quential salary. As regards qualification of the Archaka G
(Priest)/Panda/Pujari or Samarchaka at Lord Kashi Vishvanatha Temple,
there is a great deal of unanimity among Dharmashastras that the .Pujari
at Lord Vishwanath Temple should atleast have a graduation or equivalent
degree with Sanskrit and subjects such as Veda, Dharmagama, Shaivagama
and Purohitya. Though according to the scholars, it was· not initially H
prescribed to have aupadhik Yogyata (educational qualification) for the
1126 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) 2 S.C.R.

A Archak, Deval or the Samarchak at Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple, he
should be proficient in Vedocharana, i.e., the proper incantation, delivery
and pronunciation of Vedic mantras. He should practise Trikaal Sandhya.
He should be conversant with all the Mantras, Srutis and Yandanas of Lord
Sri Visheshwara. He should also be fully trained and conversant in
--
Rudrashtadhyayi. It would appear that Dharmashastras recommend that
B the process of selection for the Archakas of Kashi Vishwanath Temple
should be undertaken by a committee of traditional Dharmashastras com-
prising of_ a minimum of three renowned scholars who should be em-
powered to select the Archakas or Samarchakas from the qualified
candidates. As was held in Narayana's case, periodical training and con-
C tinuing ed~catioa would improve and augment excellence.

The right to receive offerings from the pilgrims in incidental to the
service rendered by the Arc;haka (priest). Independent of service, there is
no right to receive offerings from a pilgrim or the devotee. Therefore, the
regulation of rendering service and prohibition to receive offerings, though
IJD may affect the livelihood of a pre-existing archaka, it being a regulatory
measure, it is sequal or consequential tc. the abolition .. It is not a vested
right as such but is a right. co tip led with duty to render service. When the
service on customary basis is abolished, concomitantly right to receive ;
offerings given by the pilgrims stands extinguished and prohibited and is
E vested in the deity, Lord Shiva. It is not an acquisition of their right but it
has· only incidental and consequential effect. Equally, it is not a vested right
in the individual panda/archaka/priest de hors the service. Rights of persons
in service as archakas is not affected; on the other hand, Section 22 is
subject to regulation and extends the right to earn livelihood guaranteed
F by Adicle 21.

The further· ~ontention .that the impugned Act is overboard and is
vitiated with vice of discretionary power without any supervision or
guidelines and is ultra vires, is devoid of any force. The Act has carefully
formulated different principles, applied the same in the matter of nomina-
G lion of the members of the Board, appointment of the Executive Commit-
tee, the staff and proper and efficient management of the Temple. Even
the discretionary powers are well \vithin the parameters laid under the Act.
Even assuming that if any action is found to be in excess of the Statutory
conferment of the power of wanting in quality that would be an individual
H case which may be liable to challenge in an appropriate proceeding and
SRI ADI VISHESHWARA OF KASH! VISHWANATH 1EMPLEv. SfATE [K. RAMASWAMY. l.J 1127

for that reason the Act cannot be declared as ultra vires. A
In view of the finding that Lord Sri Vishwanath Temple is not a
denominational Temple and Hindus as such arc not denomination/sec-
tion/sect nor the appellants are denominational worshippers, the conten-
tion that Sections 6 and 3 cannot be read down so as to make the appellants
as members of the Board under Section 6 of the Act, is without any force. B
Similarly, it is difficult to accede to the contention that Section 6 must be
read down to include those persons who profess denominational Hindu
Shivaites practising as members of the Board. Equally, Sections 20(1) and
(2) cannot be read down so as to give wider powers to the "archaka"
defined in Section 4(2). Equally, Sections 22(2), 23(2)(b), 24(2) and 25(8) C
cannot be read down so as to confer functional and financial respm;
sibilities on the archaka. Thus considered, we hold that the Act does not
suffer from any invalidity except to the extent indicated in the judgment.

The appeals are accordingly dismissed but without costs.

• R.P. Appeals dismissed .