» Click here...

September 28, 2006

Mumbai: ?AT ONE word of mine or other saints, followers donate whatever they have. Men empty their pockets and women, their jewellery. They do this because of their faith in us and the religion. Why should government decide where this money goes?? As one who likes to dwell on questions of divinity, Gachadipati Hembhushan Soorishwarji Maharajsaheb, a leader of the Jain Svetambara Murti Pujak Sect, is not particularly happy at having to answer to the government.

Across Mumbai, the stirrings of discontent are evident as some of the richest and most powerful of the city's more than 5,000 Hindu, Jain and Sikh, Christian and Parsi trusts prepare to battle a new law they believe will force them to cede control to the government.

The Maharashtra Temples or Religious Institutions (Management and Regulation) Bill will come up in the cabinet next month. Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh ordered the drafting of a new law after a stampede killed 267 people at Mandradevi Temple in Satara in January 2005.
The government felt the need to stop 'mismanagement' and 'misappropriation of funds' by trusts. The proposed bill allows a government panel to control temple management by simple notification. No legislation will be required.

So, last week, more than 600 Jains gathered at Lord Parshvanath Godiji's temple in Pydhonie to demand the bill be withdrawn. ?This is discrimination,? argued BJP MLA Mangal Prabhat Lodha. ?Why doesn't the government take over institutions registered under the Waqf Board?? A Jain, Lodha is leading an agitation that he says will bring ?thousands to the streets? if the bill is not cancelled. The proposed law covers all religious institutions except masjids, dargahs and madrassas covered under the Waqf Act.

The community says the government does not need to remind it of charitable responsibility ? Jains made the largest contribution of Rs 53 lakh after the deluge last year.

The government believes there is needless panic. ?Only trusts that apply and those that the government thinks require it will be brought under the Act,? explained Arvind J. Rohee, Joint Secretary of the State Law and Judiciary Department.

That explanation isn't calming tempers. The Hindu Jan-Jagruti Samiti (HJS) ? an NGO working for religious and national causes ? is garnering support from Hindu temples to oppose the bill. ?If the government takes over temples, they will be in the same state as other PSUs,? said HJS head Ramesh Shinde. For 25 Tuesdays, he has stood outside Siddhivinayak temple protesting ?government misuse of temple funds?.

?I don't think the proposed law will see the light of day. There will be tremendous opposition. The government should not interfere in religious affairs. They should make it compulsory for temple trusts to be transparent,? said activist Keval Semlani whose PIL against ?irregularities? in Siddhivinayak temple funds is pending in the High Court.

Moreover, protestors say the passing of the bill would also mean a ?backdoor? entry for recommendations made in the Law Commission's 13th report on the Bombay Public Trust Act (1950) under which all public trusts are registered.

The report said there should be three trustees per trust ? one appointed by the government ? all income should be in a common fund, there should be no lifetime trustees, each trustee should be liable (not just the trust) and donations must be approved by the charity commissioner.
These suggestions were on hold after opposition from religious leaders and trusts. The leaders allege the government is violating their consitutional rights to preach, practice and propagate religion.
D.N. Choudhary, Chairman of the Law Commission disagrees. ?Siddhivinayak and Jagannathpuri are under the government but this has not come in the way of religious affairs,? he said.

He explains that after complaints against Pandharpur temple, Shirdi temple and Siddhivinayak temple, the government had to pass three separate acts to bring them under its control. But if the new law is passed, it will be an umbrella legislation and the three acts will be repealed.

Follow thy neighbour?

The Karnataka High Court quashed a similar Act ? the Karnataka Hindu Charitable Endowment Act of 1977 ? twice this month, on September 8 and 20, for violating the constitutional right to practice, preach and propagate religion.

Temples had appealed against a court order that declared the Act valid and said the government could appoint an Endowment Commissioner, audit temple funds, appoint archakas (priests), monitor the temple affairs and create a common pool fund

WHY THE SCARE
1. Government may take control of trusts.
2. The state will decide how trust money will be spent
3. The trusts now contribute 2 per cent of their gross income to run the Charity Commissioner's Office. If the new law is passed, that may go up to 8 per cent
4. There will be interference in religious affairs

IN CONTROL
Temples and religious institutions are presently under the Bombay Public Trusts Act (1950). The Charity Commissioner supervises public trusts but cannot appoint a government committee Trusts registered under this Act.

IN STATE - Over 4,50,000

IN MUMBAI
4,271 Hindu, Jain and Sikh religious trusts
1,219 Parsi trusts
314 Christian trusts

Quotes -
This is discrimination. Why doesn't the government take over institutions that are registered under the waqf board?
- Mangal Prabhat Lodha, BJP MLA

Followers donate whatever they have because of their faith in us. Why should government decide where this money goes?
- Gachadipati Hembhushanji, leader of a Jain sect

Source: Hindustan Times, Mumbai Edition (28 Sept 06, Page 6)

Related Story:
? Government ploy to take over 4 lakh temple trusts: Mosques excluded
? HC strikes down 'Act' on temples