Temple property belongs to deity, pujaris don’t have ownership rights, rules Supreme Court.

Hindu Deity is a living entity and owner of all assets of temple…

Deity is owner of land attached to temple, priest cannot be treated as ‘Bhumiswami’: Supreme Court.

A Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and A. S. Bopanna said the ‘pujari’, or priest, only holds the land for the purpose of management of the property of the temple.

PTI | New Delhi | Sept 7, 2021:: A priest cannot be treated as Bhumiswami (owner of land) and the deity is the owner of the land attached to a temple, the Supreme Court has ruled.

A Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and A. S. Bopanna said the ‘pujari’, or priest, only holds the land for the purpose of management of the property of the temple.

“In the ownership column, the name of the deity alone is required to be mentioned, as the deity being a juristic person is the owner of the land. The occupation of the land is also by the deity which is carried out by the servant or the managers on behalf of the deity. Therefore, the name of the manager or that of the priest is not required to be mentioned in the column of occupier as well,” the top court said on Monday.

It added that the law is clear on the distinction that the pujari is not a Kashtkar Mourushi, (tenant in cultivation) or a government lessee or an ordinary tenant of the maufi lands (land exempted from payment of revenue) but holds such land on behalf of the Aukaf Department (relating to ‘Devasthan) for the purpose of management.

“The pujari is only a grantee to manage the property of the deity and such grant can be reassumed if the pujari fails to do the task assigned to him, i.e, to offer prayers and manage the land. He cannot be thus treated as a Bhumiswami,” the Bench said.

“We do not find any mandate in any of the judgments to hold that the name of pujari or manager is required to be mentioned in the revenue record, the Bench said.

It said that the name of the Collector as manager cannot be recorded in respect of property vested in the deity as the Collector cannot be a manager of all temples unless it is a temple vested with the State.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by Madhya Pradesh challenging an order of High Court which quashed two circulars issued by the State government under the M.P. Law Revenue Code, 1959 (Code).

These circulars ordered deletion of the names of pujari from the revenue record so as to protect the temple properties from unauthorised sale by the priests.

Read this news in Bengali: পুরোহিত নন, মন্দিরের সম্পত্তির মালিক দেবতাই, জানিয়ে দিল সুপ্রিম কোর্ট

Read this news in Hindi: मंदिर के नाम संपत्ति के मालिक देवता ही होते हैं, पुजारी नहींः सुप्रीम कोर्ट

…

Courtesy: The Hindu | Sangbad Pratidin | Aaj Tak.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.