Kochi — The Kerala High Court has ruled that the ritual authority held by a temple Tantri does not equate to legal ownership of a deity's assets, dismissing a challenge to the Travancore Devaswom Board's 2012 circular on the handling of temple property. A Division Bench comprising Justices K V Jayakumar and Raja Vijayaraghavan emphasised that religious duties and property management are distinct legal concepts.

Source: Mirror Now

The dispute arose from a petition filed by the chairman and vice-chairman of the Akhila Tantri Pracharak Sabha. The petitioners challenged the Devaswom Board's 2012 circular and argued that their customary rights, rooted in the Thantra Samuchayam, gave them authority over the 'Vahanam' of the deity — the vaji vehicle sculpture removed from old flag masts when new flag masts are installed. The court rejected that claim, holding that the removed Vahanams are not the Tantri's personal property but belong to the Devaswom.

Source: Mirror Now

The court underscored that while a Tantri is responsible for supervising religious ceremonies and rituals, the role does not confer a right to appropriate, sell or manage property belonging to the deity. Under the statutory and administrative framework, all valuables and assets held by a deity must be preserved, maintained and accounted for as Devaswom property.

Source: Mirror Now

Examining Article 25 of the Constitution, which protects the freedom to practise and propagate religion, the bench noted that Article 25(2)(a) allows the state to regulate economic, financial and secular activities associated with religious institutions. The administration of temple property is therefore a secular activity subject to statutory oversight, regardless of the religious significance of the institution, the court held.

Source: Mirror Now

The bench also noted that the Devaswom Board's 2012 circular has been in effect for fourteen years and its guidelines have been followed consistently during that period, and found no compelling grounds to interfere with the established administrative practice. Performance of religious responsibilities does not automatically grant a proprietary interest in the deity's assets, the judges said.

Source: Mirror Now