DMK Lawyers Address PM Modi's Allegation

Prime Minister Modi has recently accused the Tamil Nadu government of expropriating the temple revenues. CM Stalin has denied the allegation of PM Modi by saying that Modi's point of view is wrong. According to DMK spokesperson and lawyer Rajiv Gandhi, Modi's allegation is baseless because, DMK government has recovered almost 5381.65 crores worth temple properties in just 2 years of its reign.

The DMK government has recovered the temple properties from anti-social gangs which was never done by previous governments. The recovered 5381.65 crore is a big deal because, with just 404 crores, breakfast was provided to government school students across Tamil Nadu and with 7000 crores, financial assistance was given to 1.65 crore women beneficiaries which shows the significance of the recovered temple assets.

Is Modi's allegation true? Why did temples come under the control of the government? What led to this situation? All the queries are addressed by DMK lawyers Mathivathani and Rajiv Gandhi.

Lawyer Mathivathani's point of view:

Dravidar Kazhagam is a movement that has been fighting for many years regarding temple rights and social justice. Modi's allegation regarding the expropriation of temple assets is inaccurate. According to Section 10 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, a person should profess Hindu religion, in order to be appointed as Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Joint Commissioner or even servants in temples.

Here, the eligibility is not being a Hindu by birth but the affirmation of one's allegiance to the religion. The moment someone loses their faith in the religion, they are no longer eligible to hold the post and its responsibility. Going by this rule, only Hindu believers are appointed to posts like Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Trustee etc. Even the Minister of Hindu Religious and Charitable endowments is a Hindu believer.

When all the personnel in the temple management are Hindus, the BJP government asking DMK government to give temple management in the hands of Hindus is pointless. Maybe, BJP meant transferring the temple management to the hands of Brahmins who have managed temples, generation after generation in the past.

CP Ramasamy Iyer Commission set up in 1962, mentions in its report, the inefficiency of trustees and priests in managing the temple administration. Secondly, the report highlights the improper maintenance of accounts of temple properties which were irresponsibly sold for buying liquor. Thirdly, temple properties worth 300 crore were encroached by influential people which were restored only in 2021 when DMK came to power.

"Government in any sovereign nation is a massive body which manages all affairs of the society. If such a massive body cannot manage temple properties, I think no one else can", said Mathivathani.

Rajiv Gandhi's point of view:

The Chidambaram temple is managed by Dikshitars (a Brahmin community), not by the government. Even though almost all major temples came under the control of the government, Dikshitars still manage Chidambaram which is a kind of encroachment activity.

Logically speaking, Dikshtars did not contribute anything to the temples. Kings financed the temple construction, architects designed it and sculptors made the sculptures in the temple. Summing up, the contribution of Dikshitars to Chidambaram temple is nil and yet the temple is claimed by them.

In the past, Rajaji said, "In Madras presidency, atheists like EV Ramasamy are leading the temple entry movement. Being a Hindu, I say that, people from all castes can enter temples from now on." Presently, DMK government has made it possible for people belonging to all castes to become priests which was a privilege of Brahmins in the past.

Unlike the allegations made by Modi, it is the Brahmin communities that have encroached temples, not the government. In Tamil Nadu, approximately 2 lakh temples are not under government control. As per section 10 of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, even though a government servant manages the administration, he/she should be a Hindu believer, otherwise they are deemed ineligible to hold the post.

Section 10 of the Act, necessitates appointing a Hindu believer, not a Brahmin. In mosques, being a Rawther or Lebbai doesn't matter, they are all allowed to worship in the same place. It is only in temples, people from some communities are not allowed to enter the temples and some languages are prohibited as language for worship etc.

The non-entry for some communities is a clear sign of untouchability. In order to prohibit untouchability, a department for Hindu Religious Charities was needed. In order to propagate social justice, the need for government intervention arose.