People for Dharma and Indic Collective Trust move SC challenging Uttarakhand HC verdict upholding State control of Char Dham sites

Appeals have been filed in the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court by which BJP leader Subramanian Swamy's plea against the state government’s takeover of the Char Dham sites and 51 other shrines was dismissed..In its July 21 verdict, the High Court had upheld the validity and constitutionality of the Uttarakhand Char Dham Devasthanam Management Act of 2019..The appeals filed by People for Dharma and Indic Collective through Advocate Suvidutt MS calls out the secular State for entrenching itself into the role of managing everything under the sun.It is stated that Section 2(d) of the Act, which provides for the Char Dham to be managed by the Devasthanam Board established under the Act, "leaves no possibility for preserving this law with regard to the Article 25(2)" of the Constitution..Stating that no special legislation is needed for Uttarakhand, the pleas state that existing legislation and bye-laws in relation to the Badrinath and Kedarnath Temples had already divided the secular and religious management of these shrines. Further, the state government already had necessary powers under these statutes to ensure the preservation and proper management of secular activities related thereto..The petitions aver that the High Court has erred in upholding the validity and constitutionality of the impugned Act “since its provisions are arbitrary and violative of the Fundamental Rights of all devotees of the Chhota Char Dham shrines.” It is stated,."The power to include more Temples and levy of cess on recommendation of a Board that over and above has state functionaries and those appointed/nominated by the secular state as its members is violative of the rights of citizen of administering their religious institutions as a whole. Such arbitrary power vested in the Board is violative of the devotees’ right to preserve a religious pilgrimage and its sanctity."Pleas filed in Supreme Court.It is further argued,"Article 26 is a special right created to protect the rights of denominations and sects within a community but does not preclude the general right of the communities or devotees under Article 25, i.e. to establish and manage their religious institutions in pursuance of their right to practice their religion.”.The 2019 Act had entrusted the management of various Hindu temples in Uttarakhand to a Board whose Chairman and members are, by and large, nominated by the state government.It replaced a 1939 Act, which had related only to the Badrinath and Kerdarnath temples. Apart from these temples, the 2019 Act also applied to the Gangotri and Yamunotri Dhams in Uttarakhand..Apart from contending that the 2019 Act violates Articles, 14, 25, 26 and 31-A of the Constitution, Swamy had been submitted that ideally, a Central legislation ought to have been introduced after consulting the heads of the religious denominations concerned..The High Court, however, found that no evidence was adduced to show that the temples under the 2019 Act belonged to any religious denomination, and that the legislation did not violate the rights of devotees.