Supreme Court Urges Centre to Consider Woman President for Pushkar Temple
The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to consider allowing a woman to be appointed as president of the Pushkar Temple management committee, emphasizing gender equality.
Photo by Salah Regouane
Quick Revision
Supreme Court suggested considering a woman president for Pushkar Temple.
The bench was led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.
The observation emphasizes gender equality in temple administration.
The case involves the interpretation of constitutional rights in religious practices.
Visual Insights
Pushkar Temple: Focus of SC's Gender Equality Directive
This map highlights the location of the Pushkar Temple in Rajasthan, which is at the center of the Supreme Court's recent observation urging the Central government to consider appointing a woman as its president. This brings a specific religious institution into the broader discourse of gender equality and constitutional principles.
Loading interactive map...
Exam Angles
Interplay of Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 15, 25, 26)
Role of Judiciary in social reform and constitutional interpretation
Secularism and State's power to regulate religious institutions (Article 25(2)(b))
Gender justice and women's empowerment in the context of religious practices
Governance of religious institutions and temple administration laws
View Detailed Summary
Summary
The Supreme Court has made a significant observation, urging the Central government to consider appointing a woman as the president of the Pushkar Temple management committee. This directive came from a bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, highlighting the importance of gender equality in temple administration.
The court's suggestion stems from a petition challenging the existing norms that might implicitly or explicitly bar women from such leadership roles. This move is a crucial step towards ensuring that religious institutions, while maintaining their traditions, also align with constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination. It opens up a broader discussion on gender parity in religious governance and the interpretation of fundamental rights in the context of religious practices.
Background
The issue of gender equality in religious institutions has been a long-standing debate in India, often leading to legal challenges. Historically, many religious practices and administrative roles have been gender-segregated or male-dominated.
The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, has frequently been called upon to interpret the constitutional provisions related to religious freedom (Articles 25, 26) in conjunction with fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination (Articles 14, 15). Landmark cases like Sabarimala, Haji Ali Dargah, and Shani Shingnapur have highlighted this tension.
Latest Developments
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. With reference to the Supreme Court's recent observation on gender equality in temple administration, consider the following statements: 1. The observation specifically refers to the Pushkar Temple management committee. 2. It emphasizes the principle of gender equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution. 3. The State has the power to make laws for social welfare and reform, even if it affects religious practices, under Article 25(2)(b). Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: D
Statement 1 is correct as the news explicitly mentions the Pushkar Temple. Statement 2 is correct as the observation highlights gender equality, which is a core aspect of Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex). Statement 3 is correct. Article 25(2)(b) allows the State to make laws providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus, thereby limiting the freedom of religion for social reform.
2. Consider the following statements regarding the 'essential religious practice' doctrine in India: 1. This doctrine is explicitly defined in the Constitution of India. 2. The Supreme Court applies this doctrine to determine which practices are integral to a religion and thus protected under Article 25. 3. Practices deemed 'essential' cannot be subjected to state regulation for social reform under any circumstances. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 only
- B.2 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.2 and 3 only
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. The 'essential religious practice' doctrine is a judicial construct, evolved by the Supreme Court, not explicitly defined in the Constitution. Statement 2 is correct. The Supreme Court has consistently used this doctrine to distinguish between integral parts of religion and secular practices or superstitions, thereby determining the scope of protection under Article 25. Statement 3 is incorrect. Even essential religious practices are subject to limitations of public order, morality, and health, and can be regulated by the State for social welfare and reform under Article 25(2)(b), provided the regulation does not destroy the very identity of the religion.