Supreme Court directs petitioners to approach respective High Courts regarding challenges to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts (2025)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: April 01, 2025

The Supreme Court of India addressed a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts enacted by the States of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana, as well as the Union Territory of Puducherry. The central question revolved around whether these state laws infringe upon the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 25, 26, and 31A of the Constitution of India. The bench, comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, disposed of the writ petitions, directing the petitioners to approach the respective High Courts for a more effective ventilation of their grievances.

Case Background

The writ petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging specific sections of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959; the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987; and the Pondicherry Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1972. The petitioners sought declarations that numerous sections of these Acts were ultra vires Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 25, 26, and 31A of the Constitution, arguing that they violate fundamental rights related to equality, freedom to practice any profession, and religious freedom. Additionally, the petitioners sought interim reliefs to restrain the respondents from acting in furtherance of the impugned sections.

Timeline

Legal Framework

The petitions challenged the constitutional validity of several sections of the following Acts:

• Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959
• Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987
• Pondicherry Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1972

The specific sections under scrutiny pertained to various aspects of the administration and management of religious institutions, including the powers and duties of the Commissioner, qualifications and disqualifications of trustees, utilization of surplus funds, appointment of executive officers, and financial matters.

Arguments

The arguments presented by the petitioners and respondents were not detailed in the provided source. However, it is inferred that the petitioners argued that the challenged sections of the respective Acts violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 25, 26, and 31A of the Constitution. The respondents, likely the State governments and the Union Territory of Puducherry, would have defended the validity of their respective legislations, asserting that they are necessary for the proper administration and management of religious institutions.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues for determination. Instead, it identified the overarching issue as the challenge to the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana, as well as the Union Territory of Puducherry.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The source document does not explicitly list the authorities (cases, books, or legal provisions) relied upon by the court. However, it implicitly refers to the following:

• The Constitution of India, specifically Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 25, 26, and 31A.
• Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959
• Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987
• Pondicherry Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1972

Judgment

The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petitions, granting liberty to the petitioners to file their writ petitions before the respective High Courts. The Court observed that the High Courts could consider the petitions, having regard to the various dimensions of the provisions in light of the socio-economic, cultural, and religious aspects, including historical aspects and judicial verdicts. The High Courts were also given the freedom to constitute an Expert Committee to assist in deciding the cases, if deemed fit.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the understanding that the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts vary across different states, reflecting distinct socio-economic, cultural, and religious contexts. The Supreme Court felt that the High Courts, being closer to the ground realities of their respective states, are better equipped to assess the validity of the challenged provisions, taking into account historical aspects and judicial precedents.

Key Takeaways

• Petitioners challenging the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Puducherry must now approach the respective High Courts.
• High Courts are encouraged to consider the socio-economic, cultural, and religious aspects, including historical context and judicial precedents, while evaluating the validity of the challenged provisions.
• High Courts have the discretion to form Expert Committees to assist in the adjudication of these cases.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision to direct the petitioners to approach the respective High Courts reflects a pragmatic approach, acknowledging the unique regional contexts and legal nuances associated with the administration of Hindu religious institutions across different states and union territories. This move ensures a more nuanced and informed adjudication of the challenges to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts.

Category

• Constitutional Law
• Article 14, Constitution of India
• Article 19(1)(g), Constitution of India
• Article 25, Constitution of India
• Article 26, Constitution of India
• Article 31A, Constitution of India
• Religious Law
• Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
• Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959
• Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987
• Pondicherry Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1972

FAQ

1. What was the main issue in the writ petitions?

   The main issue was the challenge to the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Puducherry.

2. What did the Supreme Court decide?

   The Supreme Court directed the petitioners to approach the respective High Courts for a more effective ventilation of their grievances.

3. Why did the Supreme Court direct the petitioners to the High Courts?

   The Supreme Court reasoned that the scheme of the respective State Acts may be distinct, and the High Courts are better positioned to appreciate the dimensions of the challenge, considering the socio-economic, cultural, and religious aspects, including historical aspects and judicial verdicts.

4. Can the High Courts form an Expert Committee?

   Yes, the High Courts are free to constitute an Expert Committee to assist in deciding the cases, if they so think fit.