Valid regulation of a religious head's removal and temporary suspension upheld without impairing essential denominational autonomy.
Sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 were upheld as a valid regulatory scheme for removal and temporary suspension of a mathadhipathi. The grounds for removal were confined to misconduct, incapacity, breach of trust, persistent default, violation of tenets, or immoral life, and the inquiry was treated as quasi-judicial with notice, hearing, and further challenge by suit and appeal. Temporary suspension and administrative arrangements pending inquiry were held to be necessary and limited measures that did not permanently divest the denomination of administration or interfere with essential religious rites. The statutory scheme was therefore found consistent with Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25, 26 and 31(1).
Issues: (i) Whether sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 were unconstitutional as infringing the petitioner's rights under Articles 19(1)(f), 25, 26 and 31(1) of the Constitution. (ii) Whether the Commissioner's power to suspend the mathadhipathi and to make temporary administrative arrangements during the inquiry violated the constitutional protection of religious autonomy and administration.
Issue (i): Whether sections 46 and 47 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 were unconstitutional as infringing the petitioner's rights under Articles 19(1)(f), 25, 26 and 31(1) of the Constitution.
Analysis: The grounds for removal of a mathadhipathi were specifically enumerated in section 46 and were directed to misconduct, incapacity, breach of trust, persistent default, violation of tenets, or immoral life. Such regulation was treated as a permissible and reasonable restriction in the interest of the general public. The procedure before the Commissioner was quasi-judicial, provided notice and opportunity of hearing, and any removal order remained open to challenge by suit with further appeal to the High Court. The substitution of the Commissioner for the civil court as the initial forum for inquiry did not by itself make the provision unreasonable or violative of equality or property rights.
Conclusion: Section 46 was upheld and was held not to violate Articles 19(1)(f), 14 or 31(1) of the Constitution.
Issue (ii): Whether the Commissioner's power to suspend the mathadhipathi and to make temporary administrative arrangements during the inquiry violated the constitutional protection of religious autonomy and administration.
Analysis: Suspension pending inquiry was held to be an integral and necessary part of the statutory procedure, because continued functioning of the office-holder could frustrate the inquiry and permit misappropriation or tampering with records. Section 47 was construed as operating only in temporary situations such as dispute regarding succession or suspension under section 46, and as requiring due regard to the claims of disciples. It did not transfer the administration permanently away from the religious denomination or authorize interference with essential religious rites and ceremonies. No material showed that the petitioner was prevented from professing or practising religion, and the arrangement for day-to-day administration was treated as temporary and justified by the pending inquiry.
Conclusion: Section 47 and the suspension arrangement were held not to violate Articles 25 or 26 of the Constitution.
Final Conclusion: The petition failed on all constitutional grounds, and the impugned statutory scheme was sustained while the temporary administrative measures were left in place during the inquiry.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory scheme regulating removal and temporary suspension of a religious head is valid where it provides specific grounds, a quasi-judicial inquiry, and only temporary administrative arrangements that do not extinguish the denomination's essential religious autonomy or permanently divest its right of administration.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
