Supreme Court dismisses plea against AP High Court decision excluding State from administration of Ahobilam Temple

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea challenging a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which had precluded State from involving itself in the administration of the Ahobilam Temple [State of Andhra Pradesh v Sri Ahobila Mutt Parampara Adhena]..The High Court had held that since the Ahobilam Temple was associated with the Ahobilam Matt, the State Endowments Department's executive officer would not be in-charge of its administrationThe apex court today refused to entertain the petition filed by the State through advocate Mahfooz A Nazki which argued that the High Court's decision allowing the Mathadipathi to be in-charge of the temple's administration was unsustainable..The plea claimed that as per Hindu Law, a Math is an independent juristic person and so is a temple. Therefore, the High Court's finding that the Math and temple were the same entity was incorrect..The High Court had held that in light of the temple’s historical association with the Math, the temple was a part of it and since an executive officer could not be appointed to administer a Math, similarly the same could not be done for a temple either. “However, it is respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has not considered the very definitional distinctions between a “temple” and a “math” which are anyway distinct independent juristic personalities”, the plea contended in this regard..Further, the State government’s appeal submitted that since the temple is clearly a public place of religious worship with unfettered access to the Hindu community, the State’s Endowment Commission should have administrative control over it.“This right is specific to the subject temple / a temple as a separate juristic entity alone, and in no way infringes on the rights and control of the Mathadipathi over the affairs of the Ahobilam Math, which is a distinct and separate juristic entity,” the petition said..Additionally, it was pointed out that the Math did not object to the publication of the temple’s name as a religious institution in 1995 and thus, the petitions were barred by limitation.A bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka, however, rejected the State's appeal.The State was represented by advocate Niranjan Reddy while Senior Advocates Satish Prasaran, C Sridharan, Advocates PB Suresh and Vipin Nair appeared for the respondents.