What is the row over Karur ‘temple land’? | Explained
The story so far: Days after a ban on registration of title deeds for 3,085 acres of patta lands of the public in different parts
The story so far: Days after a ban on registration of title deeds for 3,085 acres of patta lands of the public in different parts of Tamil Nadu’s Karur district was lifted, the Madras High Court’s Madurai Bench was approached by a Salem resident with a public interest litigation, challenging the District Collector’s decision. Collector C. Muthukumaran’s recommendation on July 9 to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Commissioner T.G. Vinay was on the lands which once lay in the name of four temples. The HR &CE officials also undertook a follow up. On July 14, the Bench directed the State government to file a counter affidavit to the petition. How did the controversy break out? On July 10, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) President C. Joseph Vijay visited Karur for the first time after the September 27 stampede last year that claimed the lives of 41 persons. Soon after, an activist T.R. Ramesh, through a post on his social media handle, accused the TVK government and the HR & CE department of handing over the lands in question —valued at around ₹25,000 crore— to “encroachers.” Subsequently, the BJP’s State president Nainar Nagendran came down on the TVK regime. What was the Collector’s decision? By advising the HR & CE Commissioner to have the restriction lifted, the Collector has paved the way for development or re-development of the properties in question, which are being enjoyed by those who or whose ancestors had been given “ryotwari pattas” individually when the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, came into effect in January 1964.
The ban was said to have been imposed nearly 20 years ago on the advice of the HR & CE department, which had claimed that the lands in question had belonged to the four temples — Sri Balasubramaniar Temple, Pugalimalai; Sri Kalyanapasupatheeswarar Temple, Karur; Ravishwarar Temple, Kuppuchipalayam and Vikrutheeswarar Temple, Venjamankudalur. Consequently, 3,390 persons who held “ryotwari patta” individually over the lands were affected, as they could not do anything with the properties. They had, for long, represented to the authorities to clear the legal hurdle. The Collector, in a press note, said the registration of the individual patta lands had been “erroneously prohibited.” On a scrutiny of records, the pattadars’ documents were found to be clean documents, HR & CE Minister Ramesh told journalists on July 14. The move would benefit, as per an estimate, nearly 10,000 persons. However, ownership over the lands would rest However, ownership over the lands would rest with the temples concerned. What does ‘minor inams’ mean? Why was the system abolished? Broadly referring to smaller parcels of land, minor inams were historically speaking given to religious and charitable institutions —which had in turn— allowed people to cultivate on their lands, by invoking “melwaram” (the right to collect tax) and “kudiwaram” (the right to actual occupancy and use of the land) rights. There is a presumption in law that temples holding inam lands have both “melwaram” and “kudiwaram” rights, unless proved contrary. The lands were also entrusted with employees of temples and those for carrying out certain tasks such as “puja,” arranging feast and supplying flowers.
The BriefWire