Endowments Departments Tamil Nadu being ruled continuously by atheists and unscrupulous persons

Endowments Departments in different states take as much as 75 percent of Temple funds and use them at their will. No accountability, no transparency and no verification.  They have the authority to suppress and subdue Hindus who question their authority. Many politicians who happened to be Hindus have become so selfish they can mortgage their culture and their country for fame, name, power and money. They can deny any thing and get away with it. Even the Courts cannot be effective. Secular government would not enforce any law that would ameliorate the Temples and the salaries for the Priests. It is shame and a disgrace on the human race itself, especially to Hindu community for its benign neglect. 

Supreme Court and Priest Salaries 

  

Most of the employees, who are classified as secular staff, of the Endowment Department are paid regular salaries. Unfortunately, majority of the priest who are classified as religious staff, are not paid commensurate with their responsibilities. Many of them are paid meagre salaries. They are not able to support their families. In some cases the salaries are not even paid on time. It is the duty of the government, Hindus and the society to treat the Priests happy and contented. 

  
The case of salary issue to the priest went all the way to Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had directed the state government in 1997 to pay salaries to temple staff on par with those of the government employees.  However even after 13 years of Supreme Court directive State government failed to take appropriate steps develop pay scales and pay the equitable salaries to the priests. 
 
Sri Kamal Kumar Swami 
Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu 

T R Ramesh 27 Jul 2011 
It is a great irony that a secular Government should deeply embroil itself in the administration and running of Hindu temples andinstitutions in the guise of supervising the secular aspects of temple administration. This grotesque policy of the Government to supervise religious institutions applies only to Hindu Religious institutions. 

  

Viselike grip on Religious Institutions 
By its own account the HR & CE Dept administers (or rather mal-administers): 
 36,425 temples 
 56 Mutts 
 47 temples belonging to Mutts 
 1721 Specific endowments and 189 Trusts 

  

This has been possible due to Tamil Nadu being ruled continuously by atheists and unscrupulous persons, a corrupt bureaucracy, adebased High Court and above all, stark apathy, indifference and ignorance among Hindus. In recent times, the covert and overt designs of Christian missionaries and agencies have added to the plight of Hindu temples. 

  

Around 1840, the then British Government started giving up administration of temples. They asked some of the prominent mutts in Tamil Nadu to look after some of the important temples and endowments. 

  
The Heads of Mutts who were happy to takeover the administration of these temples so that they are run as they ought to be run, were careful enough to get written documents or Muchalikas from the British Government, which assured them that they would not take back the temples from the Mutts. 
 

Thus some very important temples came under the complete control and ownership of these Mutts and the Mutts ran them ably and efficiently. 

The primary purposes of worship and utilization of funds meant for the upkeep of temples and conduct of rituals were never lost sight of by the Heads of Mutts or officers. While a few temples were thus brilliantly administered by the Mutts, thousands of other temples in the then Madras Presidency were handed over to the respective trustees with the then Government playing little or no role in supervising them. 

In 1925, the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1923 (Act I of 1925) was passed by the local Legislature with the object of providing for better governance and administration of certain religious endowments. The Act divided temples into what are known as Excepted and Non-excepted temples. Immediately after the Act came into force, its validity was challenged on the ground that the Act was not validly passed. For this reason, the legislature enacted the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1926, Act II of 1927 repealing Act I of 1925. 

This Act was amended from time to time. It is unnecessary to refer to the changes introduced later. Suffice it to say that the Act was amended by 1946 by as many as ten Acts I of 1928, V of 1929, IV of1930, XI of 1931, XI of 1934, XII Of 1935, XX of 1938, XXII of 1939, V of 1944 and X of 1946. A radical change was introduced, however, by Act XII of 1935. The Government was not satisfied with the powers of the Board then existing and they clothed the Board with an important and drastic power by introducing a new Chapter, Ch. VI-A, by which jurisdiction was given to the Board to notify a temple for reasons to be given by it. 
Thus, it can be seen that even in the pre-independence era, the Board had systematically consolidated its powers to take over and administer temples. Of course, this despicable intervention by Government applied only to Hindu Institutions.