Central Information Commission
Bksr Ayyangar vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 30 August, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.313, CIC Bhawan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110067)
Before Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar), CIC
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485
BKSR Ayyangar v. PIO, Archaeological Survey of India
Order Sheet: RTI filed on 11.10.2017, CPIO reply - Nil, FAO on 05.03.2018, Second appeal filed
on 09.04.2018, Hearing on 04.07.2018;
Proceedings on 04.07.2018: Appellant present from NIC West Godawari, Public Authority
represented by CPIO. Mr Arun Raj. T, Suptd. Archaeologist, Mr. Shail Kumar, SO and Mis. Sunita
Tewatia Assistant Superintending Archaeologist at CIC:
Date of Decision-30.08.2018: POSTED TO 28-09-2018 AT 12.30 NOON FOR COMPLIANCE
ORDER
FACTS:
1. The appellant, a devotee of Sri Venkateswara of Tirumala Hills in Tirupathi city and an activist working for preservation of cultural heritage, says unless Tirumala Tirupathi temples are protected as ancient Monuments, nation will lose our ancient structures, historical evidences with inscriptions, and cultural heritage.
2. He filed this RTI application with the PMO asking for the action taken by the Government of India on his representation for declaration of T.T.D. Tirumala Temples as Historical and as National Heritage Monuments. He sought the relevant note files also. He filed first appeal alleging incomplete information. The FAA, Ministry of Culture had transferred the appeal to the FAA of Archeological Survey of India (ASI). The FAA, ASI directed the CPIO (Monuments), ASI Headquarters to provide all information within 10 days.
3. And the information given was: a copy of email sent to Superintending Archeologist ASI, Hyderabad Circle. That was the action taken report CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 1 given by CPIO, Ms. Sunita Tewatia, on 13.03.2018. The CPIO from the PMO office stated on 15.11.2017 that the records up to the year 2014 were weeded out as per Retention Schedule. Complaining incomplete information about action in preserving the heritage structures in Tirumala Tirupathi, the appellant approached this Commission.
Background:
4. Central issue of this second appeal is inaction and lack of information about recognizing and protecting the Tirumala Tirupathi temples as national monuments to secure it as part of world heritage. He said. I do not have any personal interest. The larger public interest behind my request cannot be brushed aside by such routine replies. The PMO, instead of acting on such important matter simply said that papers were weeded out. ASI shared a letter written to state. TTD stonewalled information requests refusing to come under RTI Act. I have no remedy in Andhra Pradesh as TTD took U turn. Earlier TTD was giving answers to my RTI requests. There is no State Information Commission in AP and I have no constitutional remedy as no High Court is established in AP. I have no other go except to approach Central Government's Archeology department, Ministry of Culture and the PMO, who also dealt with this serious matter in routine and left the world's heritage monument to its fate with their inaction. In this backdrop of non-constitution of institutions in AP, I hope for complete information through the CIC.
Contentions
5. He reminded that Tirumala Tirupathi Sri Venkateswara Swamy Devasthanam in Tirupathi is world famous temple, rich in antiquity & culture, heritage, religious sacredness and also in income. Tirumala, the hill on which temple of Lord Venkateshwara exists since thousands of years while the origin of the idol of Shri Venkateshwara is unknown.
Most of the structures around are more than 1500 years old. Except new concrete facilities created by TTD on the temple-Hill Tirumala, different stone built structures are very old and historic. Considering the cultural heritage and archaeological value attached to this Temple and its Group, the TTD Specified Authority passed a resolution No. CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 2 354, dated 20.01.2011 to declare the said temple and its group around the temple as "Ancient Monument" under the Provisions of Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958. The moment the governance of the TTD changed hands from the specified authority to politically appointed Trust Body, the resolution appears to have been shelved, hence appellant asks: "why TTD did not implement this, and why centre did not act? He referred to the Director of Archaeology and Museums, Hyderabad who agreed with him that TTD temples should be declared as "Ancient Monuments".
6. In support of his allegation that TTD was not protecting the national and ancient monuments with due care and caution, the appellant gave the instance of demolition of the Veyyi Kalla Mandapam (=Thousand pillared Mandapam, hereinafter called Mandapam) in front of Mahadwaram (Main entrance of Lord Venkateswara Temple, Tirumala). This Mandapam was built on 18.01.1464, by the Vizianagara Emperor Saluva Malladevera Maharaj. It was demolished by TTD in 2003 without any reason, alleged the appellant. That Mandapam was used to offer quiet space for pilgrim devotees to sit, relax, and chant the name of the God in front of the Mahadwaram, find the inscriptions on the stone walls of temples enjoy the sculptures on the pillars. It was also accommodating selling of Laddus (famous prasadam of Lord). There are invaluable stone inscriptions reflecting the cultural heritage and history. Appellant was regularly writing to TTD, Archaeology department, PMO and Ministry of Culture, filing RTI applications besides making general representations on protecting these monuments. The Deputy Superintending Archaeologist, ASI wrote on 16.04.2011, to the appellant stating that such demolition was in breach of the Archaeological norms and expressed his inability, and TTD did not even inform the department either prior to or after demolition. He believed that if Tirmala temples been declared ancient monuments, TTD could not have dared to pull it down. Appellant also filed writ Petition No. 16787 of 2011 before the High Court of A.P. seeking declaration Tirumala Temples as ancient monuments. HC advised on 13.06.2011 to approach Government of India.
7. Though Mandapam was not declared as an Ancient Monument the TTD had no authority, reason or sanction to demolish it unilaterally without CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 3 discussing the need, if any, with the Department of Archaeology. He pointed out that Shrimannarayana Tridandi Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar and several other spiritual leaders vehemently opposed this demolition and undue interference into the original structure of the temple complex.
8. He objected to TTD's claim to rebuilt Mandapam somewhere else, again without following the law and norms. According to the statute and Rules, any monument of more than 100 years is demolished; the same has to be re-constructed at the same place with the same material as far as possible. But, he alleged that, the TTD has contemplated entrusting the construction of 1000 pillared Mandapam to private agency without even consulting the department of Archaeology, despite the repeated letters of protest sent by the officials of department of Archaeology of State and Central.
9. The appellant alleged that the TTD authorities have converted their power of autonomy in conducting the temple affairs, facilitating the pilgrims and managing its assets into a monopoly and arbitrarily deciding at their whims and fancies.
TTD's Response to RTI
10. Appellant said that TTD was not cooperating with ASI Hyderabad or Amaravathi circle or with ASI headquarters. TTD was answering RTI questions earlier, but now refusing to respond, though part of Endowment department of AP which is undoubtedly a public authority. More than 6000 RTI applications about Endowments department and hundreds of appeals are pending. There is no functional State Information Commission for the present Andhra Pradesh (after bifurcation in 2014) as the Government has not constituted it, in spite of High Court intervention. Now the TTD is neither transparent nor accountable. Though Hyderabad is Joint Capital of AP and Telangana, entire AP Government has long back shifted to Amaravathi, but not the High Court. Under these circumstances, the appellant said he was compelled to approach the PMO and Ministry of Culture, which sent his RTI request to ASI that pleaded inability and no control over TTD. He also alleged that, several ornaments donated in 15th Century by CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 4 Viziayanagara emperors including Sri Krishna Deva Raya, are not properly accounted for and protected.
11. Ms. Sunita Tewatia, Assistant Superintending Archaeologist, submitted that Sate Archives of Hyderabad sent a report to the National Archive of India about the monument, expressing their inability to protect it as those temples of TTD were spread over in a vast area with huge population.
12. Appellant submitted certain documents to show that TTD was giving information under RTI before it took U turn recently. The TTD responded to RTI application of the appellant, Appellate Authority of TTD Mr. M. Gopalakrishna, Dy. EO (Temple) wrote a detailed letter on 29-11-2010 (Annexure 1), in which he said: The silver idol presented by Pallava Queen Samavai is being worshiped in Shri T.T., Tirumala since then, in the name of Sri Bhoga Srinivasa Murthy. Gold pattam and Gold Vaikunta Hasthams are also. The assistance of the Department of Archaeology was sought for to identify the jewels relating. He also said: The Archakas are instructed to follow the code of conduct as envisaged in rule 153 & 154 of G.O. Ms. No. 311. Revenue (Endowments-I) dt. 9th April, 1990 (Rules under Section 97 Read with Section 153 of the A.P. and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act No. 30 of 1987 FINAL NOTIFICATION).
13. This letter proves that TTD is regularly under instructions and control of Government, one factor that establishes it as public authority under s 2(h) of RTI Act. On 24th September 2012, EE and PIO, B Jayaram Naik responded to RTI request (Annexure 2) furnishing the information regarding "Removal & Re-construction of veyyi kalla mandapam (Thousand pillar mandapam)". Within two months, Mr. B. Jayaram, the PIO took 'U' turn and claimed that TTD is not Public Authority. He stated that he was denying so under instructions of Executive Officer, TTD. He wrote to this appellant another such letter on 17th November 2012, contending that TTD is not under RTI again under the instructions from EO (Annexure 3).
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 5
1. The Right to Information Act received the assent of the President on 15th June, 2005 and got published as Act No.22 of 2005. The preamble of the said act reads as follows:
2. Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act defines Public Authority as any authority or body or institution of Self Government established or constituted i. By or under the Constitution ii. By any other law made by Parliament iii. By any other law made by State Legislature iv. By notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government. And includes any a. Body owned, controlled or substantially financed b. Non-Government organisation substantially financed.
3. The whole of the Right to Information Act revolves around the Public Authority to ensure the efficient operation of the Govt.
4. The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams is a Single Religious Institution which is governed by the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. The Preamble to the said Act brings out that this Act is to consolidate and amend the law relating to the administration and governance of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
5. The Chapter xiv of the AP Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act specifically applies to Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams. Nowhere in the said Endowments Act, it is said that this Act is brought out to establish or constitute the Religious Institutions and Endowments which is a very essential ingredient to fall into the definition of Pubic Authority under Right to Information Act. On the contrary, it is very specifically said in the preamble to the said Act that the Endowments Act is only for administration and governance of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Even in Section 95(2) of the Endowments Act it reads that these provisions of the Act shall apply to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams which shall be constituted in to a single Religious Institution for the purpose of inclusion of the list published in Section 6. Further the constitutional protection is available to Religious Institutions which are independent autonomous bodies and not established or constituted by the Government.
6. In a nut shell the Endowments Act do not establish or constitute a Charitable and Religious Institution but it is brought only for administering and for governing the said institutions. In such scenario the extension of Public Information Act to the religious institutions governed by Endowments Act appears to be remote on the basis of the definition given for the Public Authority in the Right to Information Act. The reading of the preamble of the Right to Information Act also appears its applicability on religious institutions like TTD to be remote, since TTD is administered and governed by the State government by appointing Trust Board members and in-turn the Trust Board shall function as an autonomous body.
7. Further, in the High Court or Kerala in W.P.No.30470/2008 d.t.11.03.2011, it was decided that temples and their offices are not established or constituted by or under the Constitution of India or by or under any other law made by, either the parliament or a State Legislature. They are also not established or constituted by notification issued or order made by any Government. They are not bodies owned by any Government. The fact that some of them are notified or listed temples in terms of the provisions or the HR & CE Act does not made CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 6 them institutions established or constituted by or under any law or notification or order issued by any Government.
8. Right to Information Act, 2005 under section 2(h) ....Managing or dealing with funds collected from public is not, by itself, statutory indicia to classify any authority or body or institution as a public authority under the provisions of the Right to Information Act. There is substantial difference between the concept of funds raised by collection from public contribution and funds raised by collection from public contribution and funds provided by the appropriate Government. The quality of funds generated by collection from public can never be treated as part of funds provided by the appropriate Government. Therefore, a clear distinction has to be maintained between those two concepts and every temple or institution in relation to the affairs of which funds are collected from the public cannot by that reasons alone, be brought within the definition of "Public authority"under section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act which applies to establishments which are substantially funded, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government. Whether a temple is a public temple or not decisive.
9. ...
10. Again in the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh in WP No.6560 of 2012, the applicability of the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 to all the Charitable Hindu Religious and Endowment institutions has been suspended.
11. As per the section 2(28) of the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987, "Tirumala-Tirupathi Devasthanams" means the temples specified in the First schedule and the endowments and properties thereof and shall include the educational institutions and properties thereof and shall include the educational institutions and other institutions specified in the Second schedule and the endowments and properties thereof and Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams shall be deemed to be constituted into a single religious institution for the purpose of this Act. Hence, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams is a religious institution which is also carrying out charitable activities, as it ay be appreciated that any religious activity includes charity.
12. Every religious denomination or any section thereof has the right to manage its religious affairs, establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purpose; and own, acquire and administer properties of all kinds as enshrined in Indian Constitution. In other words, every religious institution has right to manage its religious affairs which includes its religious activities, its income & expenditure, Assets & Liabilities and kept them secure as it relates to their specific Religious Institution only. They are in no way has any relationship with Public Activity or interest. It may be appreciated that any Religious denomination Hindu, Muslaman or Christian may not be willing to share its information with the public other than what is warranted and requires to be shared to them. In other words, these religious institutions are complying all Statutory Laws all the time and also the freedom given under the Article 26 of the Indian Constitution.
13. In this regard, Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Bhanunni Vs. Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admn) Dept (ILR 2011(2) Kerala 237, 2011(2) KLT 312, held as follows:
"The temples and their offices are not established or constituted by or under the Constitution of India or by or under any other law made by, either the Parliament or a State Legislature. They are also not CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 7 established or constituted by notification issued or order made by any Government. They are not bodies owned by any Government. The fact that some of them are notified or listed temples in terms of the provisions of the HR & CE Act does not make them institutions established or constituted by or under any law or notification or order issued by any Government. Insofar as the question of control is concerned, while the Government has the power to supersede the Malabar Devaswom Board, it cannot substitute itself for the Malabar Devaswom Board and it cannot be the Malabar Devaswom Board. The Governmental control, it any, as part of the revisional power or otherwise, is only statutory control, the exercise of which always depends upon the existence of the jurisdictional facts which wo9uld trigger the exercise of such statutory control. Such statutory controls which are regulatory or even adjudicatory in nature, do not in any manner, confer on the Government such control as would transform the temples and their offices as administrative units or offices of the Malabar Devaswom Board which is a statutory body; juristic person with perpetual succession and common seal. Having regard to the power of the Malabar Devaswom Board and the Commissioner to frame any scheme in relation to any Hindu public religious and charitable institution or endowment to which the HR & CE Act applies, such authority and the power of supervision or control by the Commissioner or Malabar Devaswom Board is strictly confined in the provisions of the HR & CE Act, limited and regulated by jurisdictional facts in conformity with a regulatory statute. That is not a power to control, but one only to regulate."
14. Again, on the basis of the judgment, a letter sent by the Commissioner of Endowments to all religious institutions in respect of applicability of Right to Information Act to all religious Institutions in the State has been stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has also suspended the order under the Right to Information Act requiring Hathi Ramji Mutt which is covered under the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Act to give certain information. (Case No.19399/2011). Since the applicability of the Right to Information Act to Religious Institution is sub judice.
It is regretted to inform that, the information sought by you cannot be given under the circumstances explained above.
14. AP Revenue department did not deny the request for information, and considering the TTD as public authority, it has sent the RTI application of this applicant to be answered directly by the TTD, (Annexure 4):
The appellant filed another RTI application on 11.10.2017:
To take immediate action for the immediate implementation of Archaeological Acts 1958, 1904, 1960 and by declaring the temples of T.T.D. Sri Venkateswara Swamy temple, group of temples as protected monuments and considering their ancient and historical heritage.
Action taken by the government of India for declaration of T.T.D. Tirumala, Chitoor District Temples as historical monuments and as National Heritage and also relevant action taken documents along with note files.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 8
15. By another letter dated 24.04.2018 the appellant sought -
The latest audited audit report of Tirumala, Tirupati Devasthanam, Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Tirumala, Tirupati Pin Code-517501, Chitoor District, (A.P.).
The reasons for not constructing 1000 pillars mandepam as on with relevant records.
Sri Annamacharya Keerthanas engraved on Copper plates found by TTD in Bhandagaram. Out of 32,000 Keerthanas, only we have 12,000 Keerthanas available all remaining copper plates were missed. Kindly let us know the steps taken to find out the missed Copper plates contains the engraved San Keerthanas of Annamayya.
The steps taken to find out the missed/untraced ornaments offered by Vijayanagara Emperor Srikrishnadevaraya to Lord Sri Venkateswara.
The Ornaments records, registers pertaining to the years 1952. Even after 1952 the Dept. found that many donor's names are not incorporated in the ornaments registers. Kindly let us know the steps taken to find out the registers and records.
East India Company handed over the Temple to Mahanths in 1843, till 1933 the temple was in their control, in 1952 Endowments Dept taken over the Temple. 250 jewelry items are in Chittoor District Court custody, are in Chandragiri State Bank of India lockers. Kindly let us know the steps taken to get them released, and also kindly let us know how many ancient ornaments are yet to be taken over from Mahanths.
Kindly let us know the rule of law, and reasons for depositing 1000 crores in private Banks instead of National Banks.
16. The appellant by another RTI request dated 16.01.2018 sought the Appellant Authority-
I submit that with ref. to (1) submitted RTI application to Hon'ble PM, which was endorsed to Ministry of Culture as per ref. (2) and (3),, as on I have not received any information, hence submitting first appeal to Hon'ble Ministry of Culture. Kindly furnish the information as requested in my RTI application for which I shall be glad, and very much thankful.
17. In his second appeal the appellant has submitted the following on 05.07.2018:
Sub: T.T.D. (Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam) Tirumala Chittoor District and Endowments Dept in A.P. rejecting RTI applications - In A P Commissions not appointed - Request the Commission to direct Prime Minister of India to declare TTD as public authority in the interest of public - reg.
I submitted that - In Andhra Pradesh the T.T.D. (Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam) Tirumala, Chitoor District, and Endowments Dept not respecting RTI application rejecting, stating that there is a stay in APHC. More than 6000 applications in connection with Endowments 2nd appeals are in pending at State Information Commission approximately as known.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 9 The Govt is not taking any steps, resulting no transparency and accountability in T.T.D., T.T.D. stating that it is not public authority.
In connection with T.T.D., due to these circumstances we filed applications under RTI to Prime Minister Office, in turn endorses to Ministry of Culture, endorses Archaeological Survey of India, and its officials stating that it is not under their control.
In Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam authorities stating that it is autonomous resulting its monopolism. In 2010 onwards I submitted representations to T.T.D. several times, and also the Central and State govts to protect the heritage of T.T.D. Temple, affiliated temples having historical heritage. The T.T.D. without following Archaeological norms demolished 1000 pillars mandepam and many ancient structures and did many violations. If we wanted to ask, we don't understand from whom we get information since T.T.D. rejecting the RTI. In the same way jin A P Endowments Department many ancient temples, inscriptions loosing its glory. In T.T.D. Vijayanagara Emperor donated several ornaments to Lord Balaji in 15th Century, and many donors donated valuables. There is no accountability and transparency from authorities.
In this connection I request the Hon'ble CIC to give directions to Prime Minister of India to declare T.T.D. and Endowments are public authorities and requested suitable orders.
18. Ms. Sunita Tewatia, CPIO (M) of Archaeological Survey of India wrote on 13.03.2018 in response to appellant's letter dated 11.10.2017 (RTI application) and appeal dated 16.01.2018 regarding declaration of TTD temples as historical monuments -
This is in reference to your letter dated 11.10.2017 and appeal letter dated 16.01.2018 as well as the Order of even number dated 6.3.2018, seeking information on the following:
"action taken by the Government of India for declaring of T.T.Devasthanam, Tirumala, Chitoor Distt. Temples as historical monument (Sri Venkateswaraswamy temple as monument under ASI) and as National Heritage. Send us relevant action taken documents along with note files"
19. Mr. N. Taher, Director, Monuments, ASI Delhi wrote to Hyderabad Circle ASI and Amaravati Circle ASI on March 16th, 2018 as follows:
"you are requested to inspect the site in light of AMASR act, 1958 (as amended) and Rules, 1959 and submit a detailed report along with photographs and offer your comments top this office for further action".
20. Regarding preservation of Monument, Prof. P. Chenna Reddy, Director, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Hyderabad wrote to the appellant on 22.11.2011 (Annexure 5) stating that a team of officers on request of TTD examined ornaments given by Srikrishna Deva Raya who visited seven times from 1509 to 1521 AD. He attached report CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 10 (Annexure 6) Team verified for 20 days. It says; it is concluded that no Ornament is tallied with any of the Ornaments donated by the great Vijayanagar King | Sri Krishna Devaraya to the Lord Venkateshvara as described in the inscriptions engraved on the walls of the Lord Venkateshvara Temple at Tirumala.... This is a most serious point, which need to be answered by TTD and Ministry of Culture.
21. A brief report on Physical verification of jewellery of Lord Venkateshvara, Tirumala Tirupati is Annexure 6. This deals with other allegations about jewellery of Lord. The focal point that pertains to TTD is alleged demolition of 600 year old 1000 pillars Mandapam. As per law every 100 year old structure also should be protected. It is the duty of the centre and States to protect the cultural heritage of India. This Commission need not remind that India's glory lies in its culture and thousands of years of its history, which needs to be protected.
22. A committee was constituted by TTD under the Chairmanship of Justice Wadhwa, Former Judge, Supreme Court, to verify the jewellery as per record, reported on January 21, 2011 that no item was lost and that it was fully satisfied with the system in vogue for protection and maintenance of the ornaments (Annexure 7). It submitted its 137- page report, including 22 recommendations, to TTD Specified Authority Chairman Mr. J. Satyanarayana. Mr. Justice Jagannatha Rao, who was appointed by the state government to go into the security system for the safety of the temple ornaments in TTD temples also verified the jewels simultaneously, said the Tiruvabharanam register, being maintained in Tirumala temple since 1952, had no mention of any temple ornaments received from Vijayanagar emperor Krishnadevaraya, after the identification of jewellery (items) at random in the lockers in the temple at Tirumala and other temples and also the treasury were the ornaments were in safe custody, the committee concluded that all the items were intact. Justice Wadhwa said: "We have suggested to the TTD to make use of modern technology to have a more transparent and foolproof system for the protection of jewels". The TTD is under an obligation to tell the nation that what system they have developed in pursuance of this most important recommendation of Justice Wadhwa Committee. It is a CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 11 sad development that this report along with Justice Jagannadha Rao Report should have been in the public domain. These reports are very positive reports which TTD could have claimed in their defence, when recently they came under severe criticism and controversy. This proves that TTD has done nothing to be transparent about it, but illegally attempted to escape from scrutiny of citizens under RTI Act. It is clear that TTD did not honour the recommendations of two former Judges of Supreme Court in the committees appointed by the State Government.
23. The report pointed out that there was no register for the ornaments in the temple before 1952, except the information of handing over the jewels by a priest in 1939. It is not known whether all valuable ornaments were recorded in any document. It is also not known what kind of system was followed to document all old and new valuable ornaments. The Report suggested: "In addition to the verification by Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer (FA&CAO), the committee also wanted verification by a special team to be set up and also by a team of archakas of the jewels on the main deity as others are not allowed to enter the sanctum sanctorum often for surprise verification. TTD till today did not give any action taken report on the suggestions of Wadhwaa Committee."
https://archive.siasat.com/news/wadhwa-panel-finds-all-ttd-jewels- intact-158351/
24. Several such happenings of TTD reached the High Court AP. A resident of Nellore, Mr. B Govinda Reddy filed a PIL in 2009 raising fears over the safety of the jewellery in the wake of disappearance of some gold coins from temple treasury in 2006 (Annexure 8). A Division Bench of the AP High Court, comprising Justice G Raghuram and Justice Ramesh Ranganathan directed TTD, to make an inventory of all properties, including jewellery, belonging to Lord Venkateshwara and other temples under the TTD's administrative control and submit it to the court. Significantly the HC wanted to lift the veil of secrecy over the temple properties. The petitioner's counsel senior Advocate Shri S Ramachandra Rao told the court that there was no proper maintenance of the records for jewellery. As per the present practice of the TTD Board, the entire treasury is under the CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 12 supervision of a single official, which is against the basic concept of safety. The court wondered as to why the temple administration was reluctant to make a comprehensive inventory of the jewellery.
25. The TTD took another controversial decision called 'Swarnamayam' to fix gold plates inside the walls of Sanctum Sanctorum. In a writ petition No 9004 of 2010, Mr. G Raghava Reddy challenged Swarnamayam that might damage 740 epigraphs or inscriptions on the walls with drilling of nails to fix gold plates. It is contended that the inscriptions on the prakara (Wall around) explain how ancient these monuments are, which were to be protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (central act 24 of 1958). One cannot destroy such stone documentation of history. This Act of 1958 says no unauthorized activity, which would affect or damage such inscriptions, can be taken up without prior approval of the Central Government and that for Swaranamayam, admittedly, no such prior permission is taken from the Central Government. Sri Sadhu Subramanya Shastri, the Archaeologist of TTD having researched for 8 years filed a report and thereafter Sri Sadhu Subramanya Shastri and Vijayaraghavacharya have published 5 volumes of these inscriptions by translating them to English, later printed by the TTD from 1931 to 1937. The TTD if decided to enhance the artistic aura of the Temple it is always open to them to construct even solid gold walls within or outside the temple, but not to undertake to deface the inscriptions which causes irreparable damage to the cultural heritage, petitioner challenged, the petitioner stated.
26. Article 49 of the Constitution of India mandates the State to protect every monument or place or object of historic interest, and the subject matter of resolution is not contemplated under any provision or Rule framed pursuant to the Act, and therefore, the entire gold plating exercise is unwarranted, arbitrary and illegal."
27. Articles 51 (c) and 253 of the Constitution highlight the importance attached to international law. Article 6 of the UNESCO Convention CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 13 states that the State parties shall recognize that cultural heritage situated in its territory constitutes world heritage. The above Articles were given a go-bye while passing resolution.
28. Act is not just a legislation made under Entry 28, it is traceable to Entry 12 of List - II. Under the Ancient Monuments and Historical Remains Act, 1955 which is the Central Act and the Andhra Pradesh Ancient Monuments and Historical Sites and Remains Act, 1960, wherever the Parliament or the State Legislature thought that any particular institution did not have the capacity to take care of itself, the State or the Central Government has to notify it and protect the same. Since the TTD had funds and it is supposed to have the officers who can preserve the heritage, sanctity and the holy environment there, the State thought that the TTD can do it by itself and that is why it did not notify the temple. If it is the contention of the Government that it need not protect the temple, then the Court may issue a Mandamus directing the State to register the temple. Under Rules 218 and 223 powers are conferred on the Executive Officer to do what the Ancient Monuments Act directs the authorities to do. Nowhere in the counter it is mentioned that why TTD wanted to do gold plating. It is a whimsical power exercised by the TTD. From the point of view of archaeological aspect and security aspect, there is a prohibition and that the petitioner is not on the security aspect and that the inscriptions themselves are very valuable, the judgment mentioned.
29. TTD contended referring to 10,000 holes, that the proposal is not to fix it to the main wall but there will be one inch gap and covered with copper sheet of 18 guage. About 400 to 500 holes, which are existing for electrical fixtures, will be used for fixing the copper sheet and load would not be on the prakaram wall. The HC held:
57. On the entire consideration of the historical background, as stated by both sides, it could be evident that the temple in question is an ancient one and those inscriptions on the walls right immediate around the main Deity are existing from times immemorial. We have an opportunity of hearing from both sides as to the contents of the said inscriptions. They pertain to various aspects, as submitted by the counsel, including the contributions and donations made from times immemorial by the then CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 14 kings etc. apart from the regular service to be conducted. Necessarily even on a bare reading of these inscriptions, which run into several pages, which were printed in a book form, it certainly pertains to the temple and the God presiding therein. The inscription certainly does not pertain to any other aspect other than concerning the presiding Deity and its affairs.....
Therefore, the question of treating those walls or inscriptions as such as bare structures unconnected with Deity cannot be accepted.
... Thus we hope that having regard to the nature of the inscriptions and the same being part of the very Sanctum Sanctorum as such, the Board could not have possibly taken up such issue meddling or tinkering with the inscriptions existing on the walls by proposing gold plating or otherwise in any manner. Such decision is totally outside the powers, authority and jurisdiction as vested with the Board under the provisions of the Act. The attempt on the part of the respondents, including the Board, was to the effect that the project would not affect the inscriptions.
30. The High Court noticed that the petitioners filed copy of advice by Agamasasthra Pundits, which has been obtained through an application filed under the Right to Information. The High Court Acting Chief Justice Sri B Prakash Rao finally held: "We hold that prima facie the impugned decision is bereft of adherence to the bare procedure contemplated under the law and not supported by any due prior exercise as normally required. Further the same is wholly vitiated in view of its hurried through decision by way of arising resolution. That apart, we also hold that any meddling with these ancient inscriptions on the walls of Sanctum Sanctorum would amount to interdicting with the religious aspects of the institution and it cannot form part of any secular activity and as such, the same being without any jurisdiction is violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India. The TTD decision was set aside".
(https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/56ea745d607dba369a6ef30b)
31. The TTD did not leave it even after direction of High Court. It's Chairman engaged Mr. Harish Salve and other top Advocates in Supreme Court, division Bench of which, consisting of Justice GS Singhvi and Justice Ashok Kumar Ganguly issued notices on 28.2.2011.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 15 To protect the monuments, Dr. Subrahmanyam Swamy, MP, impleaded into this litigation. Meanwhile, the Special Leave Petition got abated on 10.11.2014 after the death of the then chairman of TTD and so called swarnamayam danger to inscriptions and the wall of Prakaaram of Sanctum Sanctorium got stopped. This shows how TTD is using devotee's money to fight the public interest litigation filed by common man to save the monument. To secure the inscriptions and the walls of the Tirumala temple of Venkateshwara, common man has to spend huge money in fighting litigation in High Courts and Supreme Court, while TTD easily spends several lakhs of Rupees to take the legal battle to the top level, with an intention to defend their arbitrary decisions which potentially damage the monument, appellant alleged.
Cultural Right
32. Thus the subject matter of this second appeal is intertwined with a Constitutional mandate and requirement of rule of law. The Constitution of India guaranteed some fundamental rights and some of those which cannot be guaranteed as fundamental rights were recognized as Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. They are duties of the state, though a citizen cannot enforce them through courts. One such right is right to conserve the culture under Article 29.
Article 29. Protection of interests of minorities-(1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.....
33. The state (Central Government, State Governments and organizations like TTD) performing state functions have a duty to take measures to protect cultural rights. The state has to conserve and develop the heritage and culture.
34. There is a Fundamental duty for every citizen.
Art. 51A, Part IVA "It shall be the duty of every citizen of India:
....
(6) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 16
35. Thus it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture. The citizen-appellant in this case claimed that state has a duty to conserve heritage and he has a duty to ask for the same.
Transparency mandate
36. The TTD is basically a trust and administrative body with the duty to provide good governance of the temple affairs, as per law. Whether under RTI or not, they are answerable to people/devotees for every rupee they spend, because that money belonged to the people in general and they are wielding a very high power to spend hundreds of crores of Rupees every day. They have duty to answer every letter, criticism, or question and petition. Besides, the Right to information Act imposes an additional obligation on all public authorities to be transparent and respond with information if asked as per that Act. In response to appellant's application, the Ministry of Culture and its Archeology wing should have transferred it to TTD for the information that could not happen because the TTD claimed it was not public authority as per one stay order given by the High Court of Hyderabad.
37. TTD has heavily relied on the interim order given in 2012 in a case in which TTD was not a party to deny the accountability under RTI Act. The salient features of this order are: In Ch V S Vara Prasad Rao, founder Family Member of Sri Tirupathamma Gopaiah Swamyvarla Devasthanam, Borragudem Village, Mallavaram Mandal, Krishna District Versus Commissioner, Endowments AP, WPMP No 8331 of 2012 in WP No 6560 of 2012, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Justice Nooty Rammohan Rao) issued on 27.3.2012 an interim suspension of Circular Memo No. k3/33700/2007 dated 27.11.2007 of the Commissioner Endowment, Government of A.P. applying the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005 to all the Charitable, Hindu Religious and Endowment Institutions including Sri Tirupathamma Gopaiah Swamyvarla Devasthanam. Thereafter the Commission did not find any further development in this writ petition and it is not know how long the interim cancellation of the Circular continues. There was no record of extending this interim suspension on merits. The CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 17 Appellant said all the temples administrations in the state are exploiting this stay and claiming that they need not give any information to the people under RTI Act. The interim suspension of Circular Memo, he said, caused whole sale blocking of the transparency law and people have no way to access the information about temples, money earned, spent and accounts for the same etc. While all temple administrators in India are providing information, the temples in Andhra Pradesh refuse to do so under the garb of this interim suspension order by AP High Court. All the temples, trustees and public servants who are managing the governance of temple affairs are refusing even to receive RTI applications, or disclosing voluntarily the mandatory information under Section 4(1)(b), the Endowments Department preferred to continue its inaction by not pursuing proceedings to defend the transparency in their departments. One of the richest temples administered by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittore who designated PIOs and Appellate Authorities, responding to RTI Applications, also took a U turn and started claiming not accountable under Right to Information Act.
38. It is unheard of in the history of rule of law that implementation of an enactment of Parliament gets commenced by a circular, which could be suspended by an interim court order and because of such suspension of such circular entire law made by Parliament gets suspended. The RTI Act can not come into existence because of a circular issued by a government and the implementation of a Parliamentary enactment cannot get suspended by suspension of a circular through an interim order. Section 22 of the RTI Act clearly says that it will override any contradictory or conflicting law. The interim suspension order is not even the law because it cannot be considered as precedent. However the order of honourable court does have its force of application on the parties of the case. The TTD not being a party to this case, it cannot try to escape the accountability under RTI Act. As per the interim orders of the High Court the circular is suspended only for the purpose of the temple that was involved in litigation and it cannot extend to other temples in hypothetical manner. The context of Varaprasada Rao's case is totally different. He claims to be a founder family CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 18 member of a small temple, which has no comparison with world's rich Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams. Tirumala temple is not founded by any family. It is a Swayambhu Narayana kshetram, one among 108 Sri Vaishnava Divya Deshams wherein Alwars (pious devotees) praised the Perumal (God Almighty) in Dravida (Tamil) Pasurams. No family member like Varaprasadarao could claim any authority over the most ancient Tirumala Temple. This order cannot be used by TTD to stonewall RTI requests.
Temples are public authorities: Madras High Court
39. An interim order of High Court cannot be preferred to a full-fledged final order of Madras High Court, which held that temples are public authorities and hence accountable under RTI Act in a writ petition "Prem Anand, Hereditary Trustee, Sri Vengeeswarar Alagarperumal and Nagathamman Koil Devasthanam, Vadapalani Vs. the Commissioner, HR&CE., Chennai (W.P.No.14692 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012) decided by Justice K. Chandru on 11.06.2012. (https://indiankanoon.org/doc/188938986/)
40. The Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (HR&CE) Department, Chennai issued a circular No.50838/2008 K-4 dated 27.03.2012, notifying that in respect of temples in which hereditary trustees are administering the temple as well as where there are scheme decrees, the trustees of the concerned temple were appointed as Public Information Officers. Earlier Tamil Nadu Information Commission recommended bringing temples under RTI Act. There respondent contended exactly like that of the TTD in this case and Varaprasada Rao in AP case referred above. It was contended that as a temple is not an administrative unit or an office of the HR&CE department, it cannot be brought under the definition of Section 2(h). Refusing this contention, the Madras High Court said: "In the present case, the temple is a public institution. Merely because it is administered by an hereditary trustee, the public character of a temple will not disappear. Temples are clearly brought under the HR&CE Act and further, public collections are made for conducting various activities of the temple including rituals. The State Government also CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 19 spends huge amounts every year for administering the department to manage the temples and also releases various grants for renovation of the temples including special grants for conducting Kumbabhishekams periodically. When that is so, it cannot be said that the temple is a private institution for the purpose of the RTI Act. In fact, if the temple is substantially financed by the State either in the form of administrative expenses or in the form of non recurring expenditure, certainly, it would be the institution covered by the provisions of the Act. Under the RTI Act, even a private body substantially funded by the State is covered by the RTI Act. When information is sought for and if the activities of the temple will be kept secret, then it may also result in gradual deterioration of the temple administration. It cannot be contended that the temple activities are private activities and not covered by the provisions of the RTI Act".
41. Madras High Court further explained: "Further, once it is held that the temple is covered by the provisions of the RTI Act, certainly the unit will have to have a public information officer. In respect of hereditary temple as well as a unit run by scheme decrees, the information is solely available only with the trustees or the trust board. It is too much for the executive officer to seek an information from those trustees and thereafter pass on the information to an information seeker. As rightly found in the impugned order, having dual authority will only create bottlenecks in the free flow of the information. As to what information is to be provided is also circumscribed by the provisions of the RTI Act. Hence they can always take such defences as are open to them. Even if the information officer directs an information to be furnished, that can be subject matter of further appeals to the appellate authority as well as second appeal to the Information Commission". Writ petition was dismissed and circular of Tamil Nadu Government covering Temples under RTI Act sustained. Andhra Pradesh Circular is also similarly worded to make the temple administration accountable.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 20 TTD: Statutory Body constituted under Act of AP Legislature
42. To understand the statutory basis, legislative source of authority, executive control and public activity of TTD, following history of management of Tirumala temple is relevant. The TTD was established in 1932 under the TTD Act of 1932. According to the Act administration of the temple was vested in a committee of seven members and overseen by a paid commissioner appointed by the Madras Government. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institution and Endowments Act (1969), by sections 85 to 91, expanded the provisions of TTD. The number of trustees was expanded from five to eleven with compulsory representation from certain communities. Apart from the responsibilities defined in the previous act, Devasthanam was obliged to promote the study of Indian languages and propagate Hindu Dharma by research, teaching, training and literature creation. The A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act (1987) superseded the 1979 Act.
43. According to the 1932 Act administration of the temple was vested in a committee of seven members and overseen by a paid commissioner appointed by the Madras Government. Advising the committee were two advisory councils - one composed of priests and temple administrators to aid the committee with the operations of the Tirumala temple, and another composed of farmers for advice on Tirumala's land and estate transactions.
44. The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institution and Endowments Act (1969), sections 85 to 91, expanded the provisions of TTD. The number of trustees was expanded from five to eleven with compulsory representation from certain communities. Apart from the responsibilities defined in the previous act, Devasthanam was obliged to promote the study of Indian languages and propagate Hindu Dharma by research, teaching, training and literature creation.
45. The A.P. Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act (1987) superseded the 1979 act. The Board of Trustees' membership CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 21 was expanded from a maximum of eleven to fifteen and the hereditary rights of temple priests and their right to garner a share of the hundi proceeds were abolished. After increased pressure from the priests over a long period, the AP government made an amendment to the act in 2006, to discontinue these two controversial clauses. APCHRIE Act 1987 is made to consolidate and amend the law relating to the administration and governance of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the state of Andhra Pradesh. This act will apply to all Hindu public religious institutions and endowments whether registered or not. Under this Act the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams formed an integral part of Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the State of Andhra Pradesh. A separate chapter (Chapter - XIV) was prescribed for TTD. The organization chart of this temple is as follows:
Government of Andhra Pradesh ↓ Ministry of Endowments ↓ Endowments Commissioner ↓ TTD Board of Trustees ↓ Executive Officer
46. The management, administration and organisation of TTD are subject to the guidelines issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh through the Ministry of Endowments. The Government controls the TTD through the constitution of the Board of Trustees and appointment of the Executive Officer and other officers on deputation. The Board of Trustees is constituted by the government. The Executive Officer is the chief executive of TTD. He is assisted by two Joint Executive Officers, Chief Vigilance and Security Officer, Conservator of Forests, Financial Advisor & Chief Accounts Officer, and Chief Engineer. Besides, there are officials to look after the different branches of administration. The Chairman of the Board of Trustees is appointed by the state CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 22 government of Andhra Pradesh for a period of two years. The Chairman is not eligible for drawing any salary or other remuneration from the funds of TTD except such honorarium or compensatory allowance or travelling allowance as may be prescribed from time to time. TTD has almost all the departments that would be in a government, including production (laddus), engineering (dams and roads), water supply, human resources, transport, procurement and marketing, finance and accounting, public relations, information technology, forest and gardens, educational institutions and hospitals, revenue and general administration.
Public Authority Section 2(h): "public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self- government established or constituted--
a) by or under the Constitution;
b) by any other law made by Parliament;
c) by any other law made by State Legislature;
d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any--
(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
(ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;
Government's control over TTD
47. Section 95 of the Act 1987 says: (1) The provisions of this chapter (XIV) shall apply only to the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams. (2) The other provisions of this Act shall, subject to the provisions of this Chapter, apply (i) to the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, which shall be constituted into a single religious institution for the purpose of inclusion in the list published under clause (a) Section. Section 96 says there shall be a Board of Trustees. All the properties are entrusted to this Board by this chapter of Act. The powers of the Board are detailed in this exclusive chapter of the Act. Government has the power to dissolve and reconstitute the Board as per Section 105. Minute aspects of management, administration, duties and delegation of powers are explained through clear provisions of the law. People have a right to CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 23 know whether the duties prescribed by this Act of 1987 are being performed and the progress thereof. The Act also provided for several institutions like Hindu Dharma Rakshana Samstha. They are also public authorities. Even the civic administration of Tirumala Hills was entrusted to the TTD Board through Section 114. As per this section begging is prohibited and EO was given powers to impose penalties for violating the norms prescribed under this Act. The TTD Board and officers have 'state' powers. The Budget of the TTD Board has to be sanctioned by the Government. The Government Audit and Accounts officers have to conduct audit of the accounts of the TTD. Government has power to review the orders of the officers as per Section 122. The EO will administer oath of office to Chairman and other members of the Board, without which they will have no power to administer.
48. Thus TTD Board of Trustees is constituted under Section 96 of the AP Act of 1987, which is enough to invoke Section 2(h) to bring TTD under the RTI Act. The Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam Board being constituted under enactment made by Andhra Pradesh State legislature, hence it squarely falls under Section 2(h)(c). It is part of Endowments department, which is a wing of AP State Government and hence TTD also is public authority. Assuming that it is an institution of self-government, it is constituted by AP Charitable and Religious Institutions Act, 1987. Under Section 2(h) and clause (i) body owned, controlled is public authority. State's endowment department owned it and totally controls it. Under this clause also it cannot escape from the RTI Act. Endowments department has not funded the TTD, but all the officers of Government appointed to the TTD are paid by the TTD. Based on the proportion prescribed by the AP Act of 1987, the TTD contributes lion's share of funds to the Common Good Fund, which is controlled by the State Government. All government employees working under TTD are not paid by the Government and TTD in addition contributes to the Common Good Fund, which imposes an obligation on the Government to be accountable how it is spending that money and what duties are being performed by the Government Officers who are paid by the TTD. Because people's representative Government is receiving huge amounts from TTD, the Government CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 24 should be accountable to the millions of the devotees who donate every day huge wealth to Lord Venkateshwara which is entrusted to the TTD. The TTD is responsible for the people whose money it has to manage with responsibility. It's absurd, immoral and illegal to plead that TTD is not accountable to people under RTI Act. Such an unreasonable plea raises suspicion that something is rotten in it, and it wants to hide. The TTD being one of the most efficiently administered organization has no reason to fear the RTI Act and escape the accountability or answerability. The TTD has to make elaborate arrangements to make whole lot of information available to the people on their own as per the mandate of Section 4 of the RTI Act. It might be apprehensive that thousands of RTI applications will be filed. To tackle them it should have big team of PIOs and First Appellate Authorities. They have no dearth of money and the donors of that money, the people have every right to demand every bit of information about the way they are spending the money they have donated to Lord Venkateshwara which was being done by nominated Trust Board and selected senior public servants.
49. The TTD is totally controlled by the Government of Andhra Pradesh through exercising its authority to appoint its senior administrative officers as EO, JEO, Security Officers, Law officers etc. TTD exercises revenue powers over Tirumala Temple.
50. A trust is a body for the welfare of the people in general, beyond the parties to the trust and hence should be responsible, accountable and answerable to any member of the society. A temple is a public institution like the trust that administers temple is. All the wealth of TTD is because of donations of the pilgrims in the Hundi. The TTD is undoubtedly an efficient organization offering excellent services to the pilgrims. Nowhere in the world has any organization managed the crowd of 50000 to one lakh every day like TTD. But it does not mean that they are earning profits because of their efficiency. The Chairman, EO or any public servant in the TTD are servants of the Lord and also his devotees and each rupee of the income is gifted away by the people from very low income to upper income classes. For above reasons, the TTD is the public authority under RTI Act.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 25 Decision:
51. The Commission noticed following serious information related Issues:
a) that Director of Archeology and Museums Hyderabad has found after due verification by 20 member team "that no Ornament is tallied with any of the Ornaments donated by the great Vijayanagar King | Sri Krishna Devaraya to the Lord Venkateshvara as described in the inscriptions engraved on the walls of the Lord Venkateshvara Temple at Tirumala.... This is a serious issue of loss of cultural heritage, which deserves attention of PMO, Ministry of Culture and Government of Andhra Pradesh. It is not a wild allegation of the appellant, but a major finding by the Director of Ministry of Culture, which was not acted upon since 2011.
b) In one of the PILs the Honourable HC said: The court wondered as to why the temple administration was reluctant to make a comprehensive inventory of the jewellery. This question was not yet answered.
c) In another PIL, the AP HC held that "any meddling with these ancient inscriptions on the walls of Sanctum Sanctorum would amount to interdicting with the religious aspects of the institution and it cannot form part of any secular activity and as such, the same being without any jurisdiction is violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India"? What action was taken by TTD, Govt of Andhra Pradesh and Ministry of Culture, on this pertinent question raised by Honorable AP High Court?
d) Resolution No. 354, dated 20.01.2011 of TTD Specified Authority to declare the said temple and its Group around the temple as "Ancient Monument" under the Provisions of Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958? Till today this resolution was not implemented. What action was taken on this resolution by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Ministry of Culture and PMO?
e) Justice Wadhwa and Justice Jagannadhar Rao Committee reports are not made public so far. Why? They recommended for CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 26 "transparent and foolproof system for the protection of jewels": What is the response on this recommendation?
f) Another major issue, repeatedly raised and pending since a long time is the demolition of Veyyi Kalla Mandapam without any authority or sanction and its' re-erection as per law. This also was not satisfactorily answered so far by any authority including TTD, Government of Andhra Pradesh (Endowments Dept) or Ministry of Culture. When they have not answered, appellant approached PMO and Ministry of Culture. What action was taken on this?
52. Who has information on these issues and who has to provide? The Ministry of Culture and its Archeology department has the onus to provide this information to the appellant, and to the people of India. As this issue is intertwined with Government of Andhra Pradesh, its endowments department and its essential part, the TTD, have obligation to provide this information. Collectively and separately they are liable to answer.
53. The TTD, being an intricate part of endowment administration, came into existence by an exclusive chapter in AP statute, is a public authority. It deals with the people's money and totally controlled by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, through Endowments Department, its members and chairman are appointed by the Government of AP. It is answerable as trust, as receiver of donations, as manager of ancient National monuments of world heritage, whether declared or not under the Central and State Acts, as representative/part of the Government of Andhra Pradesh under the Act of AP and also under RTI Act, 2005. Even the TTD knew it and answered RTI applications through its PIOs, dealt with first appeals through designated officers. They have simply stopped answering RTI requests without any authority, written instruction or legal order. TTD cannot blow hot and cold regarding their accountability under RTI Act. Being religious, dhaarmik and cultural organization, it is immoral, illegal and unethical for TTD to deny transparency and accountability obligations. Based on facts, law, their acquiescence and judicial precedents the TTD has to be the public authority covered squarely under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 27
54. When one of its biggest temple committee is claiming as not accountable and answerable, the Government of Andhra Pradesh and its Endowments department should have taken the responsibility to implement RTI in TTD and also obliged to provide information in discharge of their responsibility under RTI Act.
55. The Ministry of Culture and its department of Archeology have a duty to protect national monuments and ornaments of Vizianagara empire. The Union Ministry of Culture under the leadership of PMO is expected to take all measures to ensure the protection of the national or world heritage coupled with the ancient Hindu Religious Organization like TTD. Especially when the TTD demolished Veyyi Kalla mandapam, not developing transparent systems to protect ancient jewellery as advised by Justice Wadhwa, adamantly refusing to come under RTI Act, rejecting RTI applications, and fighting upto Supreme Court to drive nails into prakaram of Garbha Griha making thousands of holes, which can damage hundreds of historic inscriptions, the irrevocable proof of antique culture of India and world heritage, in the name of Gold Plating Swarnamayam, etc, Government should have intervened. But they allowed the TTD to exercise an absolute power, which it did not have. People have no mechanism to secure information because of non constitution of State Information Commission and also State High Court within state, a tragedy to transparency and rule of law, indeed. In such circumstances it is the duty of Ministry of Culture and Department of Archeology of Union of India to coordinate with the state bodies to know what exactly happened and assure the people that ancient monuments would be protected.
56. The PMO needs to understand that it was not simple question of weeding out a representation of appellant, but taking up concrete measures for securing the monuments of glorious cultural past of India reflected in Tirumala Temples and diamond studded golden ornaments of olden times, without leaving it to the sweet will of political bosses of TTD. The TTD itself should conduct itself like sincere trustee and not as corporate managing directors, continue answering RTI requests and strictly adhering to norms and complying with furnishing 17 categories of information under Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act on their own. Managing temple is not commerce, and the information has not commercial.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 28
57. Hence, the Commission directs the CPIO of PMO to inform what action the Government of India is contemplating to recognize the Tirumala temples as national monuments and to enforce international obligation to protect the world heritage structures and ornaments.
58. The Commission considers that the CPIO of Ministry of Culture, the ASI with the State Archeology Department, Ministry of Endowments of Government of Andhra Pradesh and TTD have statutory obligation to answer the questions listed in Paragraph 51 above, as part of Section 4(1)(b).
59. The Commission strongly recommends the CMO, Government of Andhra Pradesh to instruct the TTD to strictly implement RTI Act 2005 by appointing required number of PIOs, First Appellate Authorities besides periodically updating the voluntary disclosures as mandated under Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act. Before that, the Commission strongly recommends the CMO of Government of Andhra Pradesh to constitute State Information Commission with Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners drawing from eminent people from various walks of life prescribed under RTI Act, 2005, without any delay, as opined by the High Court of Hyderabad, and Supreme Court, so that a mechanism to hear second appeals from arbitrary rejections of RTI requests like this, and also to constitute High Court for AP as mandated by AP Reorganization Act, 2014, because of lack of which, the appellant could not pursue remedies to get information required.
60. The TTD is possessing and managing those ancient structures and ornaments, which are national monuments, though not formally declared, need to be conserved as world heritage. Similarly, to the extent of protecting national monuments entrusted with the Ministry of Culture and Archeology department, the Central Information Commission has jurisdiction over 'information' related to monuments and ornaments. The TTD cannot refuse to provide such information requests regarding monuments and ornaments, to bring in transparency, accountability and answerability and to prevent corruption as per aims and objectives reflected in preamble of RTI Act. The CIC considers the EO of TTD (because of whose instructions the CPIO claimed to have refusing to answer the RTI requests) as appropriate authority, because he is in possession of required CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 29 information which is being illegally denied. He is supposed to provide information when the Central or State Archeology departments were seeking, regarding their actions in securing the national monuments and ornaments, including on the points mentioned in Paragraph 51 above to ASI, Delhi, and place that in public domain on their own fulfilling its obligation under Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act. The Commission but strongly recommends the EO, TTD to explain, if he has any objections as to why CIC should not direct the Ministry to collect above information from TTD, and the EO to furnish this information to Ministry of Culture or PMO, by 28th September 2018.
61. The Commission very strongly recommends the TTD to give up illegal stand of running away from the accountability under RTI Act and re-start providing information to the RTI requesters and provide the information sought by the appellant, in addition to answering questions in Paragraph 51.
62. The case is posted on 28th September 2018, at 12.30 noon, for compliance by all respondents.
SD/-
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Central Information Commissioner
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 30
Annexure 1
From Office of
M. Gopalakrishna, M.Com the Dy. Exe. Officer (T)
Deputy Executive Officer (Temple) & T.T. Devasthanams
Appellate Authority Tirumala
Roc. No. P8/388/Sri TT/Tml/2010
Dated 29-11-2010
To
Sri BKSR Iyyengar,
24-B, 10-27
Raghavacharya Street
Ramachandra Rao Pet
Eluru - 534 002
W.G. Dist.
Sir,
Sub: TTD - Peishkar Office, Sri T.T., Tirumala - Requested to furnish information under RTI Act - Furnishing of Reply - Regarding.
Ref: N.Dis.Lr.Roc.No.C3/8520/2010, dt: 25-08-2010 along with your letters thereon.
In reply to your letter, I am hereunder furnishing the details as requested by you under RTI Act.
The silver idol presented by Pallava Queen Samaval is being worshiped in Shri T.T., Tirumala since then, in the name of Sri Bhoga Srinivasa Murthy. Gold pattam and Gold Vaikunta Hasthams are also Sri. T.T., Tirumala. The information that they were donated by respective donors is to be confirmed for which the assistance of the Department of Archaeology was sought for.
Yes, the Tarigonda Vengamamba Muthyala Harathi is being offered to lord every day during Ekantha Seva.
There are jewels of earlier centuries, but the conformity that a particular jewel was donated by particular king was not made available for each and every jewel in the records. However, there are some jewels in which the details of the donors were recorded. The assistance of the Department of Archaeology was sought for to identify the jewels relating to a particular century. The umbrella presented by the Mysore king is available in Sri. T.T. The Darshan facilities provided to the Protocol VIPs are as per the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time. The Archakas are instructed to follow the code of conduct as envisaged in rule 153 & 154 of G.O. Ms. No. 311. Revenue (Endowments-I) dt"9th April, 1990 (Rules under Section 97 Read with Section 153 of the A.P. and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act No. 30 of 1987 FINAL NOTIFICATION).
Further, your suggestion on point 3 will be examined.
This is for information.
In the service of Lord Venkateswara Sd/-
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 31
Annexure 2
From Office of
B. Jayaram Naik, B.Tech. the Dy. Exe. Officer (T)
Executive Engineer - VIII T.T. Devasthanams
Tirumala
Roc. No. C1/12/EE-VIII/TTD/Tml/11
Dated 24-09-2012
To
Sri BKSR Iyyengar,
24-B, 10-27
Raghavacharya Street
R. R. Pet, Eluru - 534 002
West Godavari District.
Sir,
Sub.: TTD - Engineering Department, Executive Engineer-VIII Division, Tirumala, Certain Information requested under RTI Act - 2005 - Information related to veyyi kalla mandapam - Furnished - Regarding.
Ref: 1. Application Dt. 12-07-2010 of Sri BKSR Ayyangar, R.R. Pet, Eluru, West Godavari District.
2. Note Roc. No. C1/15/SE-II/TTD/TPT/2012, dt. 03-09-2012
3. Roc. No. C3/22023/AEO(Inv)/TTD/TPT/2006, dt. 30-08- 2012
4. Note orders of the Executive Officer, TTD, Tirumala, dt. 23- 09-2012 *********** With reference to the above, I am here with furnishing the information regarding "Removal & Re-construction of veyyi kalla mandapam (Thousand pillar mandapam)" at Tirumala and action taken since 10 years is submitted for kind information.
The TTD in its Res. No. 704 dt. 29/30-01-2003 has sanctioned various proposals involved in the construction of mahaprakram (thruthiya prakaram) of Sri Tirumala temple and accorded administrative sanction of Rs. 72.00 crores for the project.
In the said proposals one of the proposed is " to dismantle the existing thousands pillar manapam and reconstruct the same at the location where the PPC shed are located now i.e. between North Mada street and North-West side of the proposed prakarams. For that an amount of Rs. 4.80 crores sanctioned administratively.
In this connection, it is bring to submit that, some portion of veyyi kalla mandapam was dismantled in 1970's due to dilapidated condition front side of the mandapam and also in central portion of the mandapam.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 32 There are about 154 no. of stone pillars that have been removed due to dilapidated condition. Further it is submitted that this mandapam is not in original shape due to removal of said stone pillars. It is not being used properly due to loss of its stability. And also due to weathering of rock, some of the elements may get damaged. It is essential to remove the mandapam due to dilapidated condition and also for developmental purpose to re-erect the same duly introducing new stone pillars, stone slabs and new stone sculpture work where ever required so as to get the original shape of the mandapam. Based on the board Res. 704 dt. 29/30- 1-2003 the balance portion of veyyi kalla mandapam was dismantled I the year 2003 and kept the available structure for further use.
The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh vide GO.MS. No. 830 dt. 19-10-2004 have decided to appoint a committee of eminent persons well versed with the management of TTD to go into the various issues and proposed activities contemplated by the TTD for development of Tirumala and its surrounding areas to advise the Govt. and TTD Board on a course of action which would be correct from the Administrative and religious point of view.
Out of which one of the reference is to advise whether veyyi kalla mandapam is a religious structure and the advantages/disadvantages in reconstructing the same at the same place keeping in view the decision taken by the Govt. through memo no. 24406/Endls.III/A1/2004, dt 09- 08-2004 and to suggest further course of action.
The three member committee submitted the report to the Govt. of AP on 01-03-2005. The Govt. of AP vide its memo No. 24406/Endls.III/A1/2004-11, dt. 17-03-2005 has communicated a copy of the report of the committee to furnish the TTD Board views on the report of the Committee The subject matter was placed before the TTD Board of trustees meeting held on 28-09-2005 based on discussions, the committee's recommendations for construction of the Maha mandapam in the Eastern open space duly utilizing the useful members of veyyi kalla mandapam cannot be considered as the open space is being effectively used by the pilgrims. Further, the Brahmothsavams-2004 and 2005 passed off without any stampede mainly due to the open space, where pilgrims coolly sit and see the procession with devotion. Construction of maha mandapam at the same place will defeat the very purpose of removal of Veyyi kalla mandapam and other shops.
If there are vasthu and religious reasons to have a weighted structure at the South-East corner of the temple in the open space, a small mandapam can be thought of without substantially taking away the advantage of the side open space.
The removed eyyi kalla mandapam can be located at the North- West corner of the temple (or) any other suitable location.
Accordingly based on the minutes of meeting and the TTD Board has resolved vide Res.No.433 dt. 24-10-2005 to permit the construction of a mandapam of permanent nature of structure (suitable name to be evolved) in the South-East corner of the open area measuring 200' CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 33 (North-South) by 100' (East-West). It was also decided to use all available pillars of dismantled 1000 pillar structures. The mandapam should look as ancient structure. The Hon'ble High Court of AP in its judgement in Writ petition No. 5096 of 2004, dt 04-01-2007 made the following order.
"In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for issue of a decision t the respondents to reconstruct one thousand pillared mandapam in Tirumala hills in its original place and to appoint a committee of Srivaishnavite acharyas Agama specialists and eminent scholars along with competent architects and engineers to study and report on the feasibility and execution of the master plan proposed by the TTD for improving and developing the temple of Lord Venkateswara and its surroundings. The Writ petition was disposed of as in fructuous with liberty in terms of the prayer made". The other Writ petitions 10853 of 2004, 19343 of 2004 filed by various petitioners were also disposed of by the Hon'ble High Court fo AP based on the above judgement.
After that the TTD Board in its Res no 797, dt 22-03-2008 accorded administrative sanction for Rs. 9.75 crore for "Construction of Stone Mandapam in front of Srivari temple at Tirumala". The tenders were invited to take up the work. The tender of M/s. Irrigation Equipment Corporation, Secunderabad at (+) 10% excess over the estimated contract value was approved by the TTD Board in its Res. No. 574 dt 22- 11-2008. So far the site was not handed over to the contractor due to administrative reasons.
As the finalization of location of building was getting delayed the agreement concluded for the work was cancelled in April 2010 duly refunding the EMD and Insurance premium. However, the contractor M/s IE Corp. Secunderabad vide letter dt 29-07-2010 requested to reimburse the technical agent charges of Rs. 6,00, 000.00 and bank charges of Rs. 1,97,332.00. they also sought to know the administrative reasons of cancellation. Hence, the matter was placed before the TTD Board to take a decision on the request of the contractor. The TTD specified Authority in its Res. No. 154 dt. 04-10-2010 The agreement of the M/s Irrigation Equipment Corporation, Secunderabad was concluded in the month of 02-06-2009. As could be observed from the above, the response for the tenders is poor and it may take considerable time for getting response in case of re-tenders also. Further, the new SSR rates are applicable now and the cost is likely to go up. It is preferable to revive the agreement if the contractor comes forwarded t take up the work at the same agreement rules, tender percentage and on the same terms and conditions duly collecting the amounts towards EMD and Insurance.
The TTD Specified authority approved the above proposals vide Res. No. 212 dt. 2-11-2010. Accordingly, the contractor has accepted the same agreement rates, tender percentage and on the same terms and conditions by submitting the EMD and Insurance. The site was also handed over to the contractor on 10-11-2010 to commerce the work.
M/s. Irrigation Equipment Corporation, Secunderabad has started the work as per approved plans and completed up to the basement with RCC structure. The all-round, Inner and outer RCC pedestals are to be CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 34 covered with the dismantled 1000 pillar mandapam stone structure. The firm has erected stone upapeetam i.e. basement, with the available 1000 pillar mandapam stones. The erection of stone pillars, podigai, etc. the available stone beams, stone kodangai of 1000 pillar mandapam structures are not suitable to the proposed stone mandapam and it has to procure with new stones. In the proposed stone mandapam the available stone pillar 90 (ninety) nos. are proposed to look like ancient structure. The middle hall portion will be proposed with PEB structure. (Pre Engineered Building). Unfortunately, the firm has stopped the work without any intimation to the department. Several notices were served and contacted the firm. But there is no response from the firm. A final notice was also served and acknowledged by the contractor. The file was circulated to the higher authorities to take further action as per codal rules. The balance work will be taken up after receiving appropriate orders.
Encl:
1. TTD Board Res. N. 704 dt. 29/30-1-2003
2. Go.M.S. No. 830, Dt. 19-10-2004.
3. Three men committee summary of recommendations.
4. TTD Board Res. No. 433, dt. 24-10-2005
5. TTD Board Res. No. 574, dt. 22-11-2008
6. Specified Authority Res. No. 212, dt. 02-11-2010 In the Service of Lord Venkasteswara Sd/-
Executive Engineer-VIII Public Information Officer CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 35 Annexure 3 "OM NAMO VENKATESAYA Office of the Executive Engineer-VIII T.T.Devasthanams, TIRUMALA Date: 17-11-2012 From B.Jayaram Naik, B.Tech, Executive Engineer-VIII Roc.No.C1/12/EE-VIII/TTD/Tml/07 RTI Act-RPAD To Sri B.K.S.R.Ayangar, 24B-10-27,Raghavacharya Street, R.R.Pet, Eluru-534002, West Godavari District Sir, Sub: TTD-Engineering Department, Executive Engineer-VIII Division Tirumala - Certain information requested by the applicant under Right to Information Act - Reply furnished - Regarding -
Ref: 1) Application Dt.26-3-2010 of Sri B.K.S.R.Ayyanmgar, R.R.Pet, Eluru, West Godavari District
2) Roc.No.C1/11/CE/TTD/TPT/2011 dt.14-9-2012
3) Roc.No.C1/15/SE-II/TTD/TPT/2012, dt.15-9-2012
4) Roc.No.1714/CC/CE/TTD/TPT/2011, dt.14-9-12 (Telephone Message)
5) Note orders of Executive Officer, TTD dated 17-10-2012
6) N.Dis No.B5/15139/2012 dt.05-11-12 Kindly refer to your letter dt.26-03-2010, received in this office on 17-09- 2012 through Nodal Officer (RTI Act) TTD Tirupati under Right to Information Act, 2005.
With reference to the 1st cited above, the information regarding "Dismantling of Veyyi Kalla Mandapam (Thousand pillar Mandapam)"at Tirumala, whether permission accorded by the Govt for dismantling of the thousand pillar Mandapam at Tirumalaand further requests to the Govt to reconstruct the thousand pillar Mandapam with the same stones used for the Mandapam, the following is furnished.
I am under the directions of the Executive Officer, TTD in the reference cited to inform that Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams does not come under purview of Right to Information Act under the following provisions.
13. The Right to Information Act received the assent of the President on 15th June, 2005 and got published as Act No.22 of 2005. The preamble of the saifd act reads as follows:
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 36
14. Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act defines Public Authority as any authority or body or institution of Self Government established or constituted v. By or under the Constitution vi. By any other law made by Parliament vii. By any other law made by State Legislature viii. By notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government. And includes any c. Body owned, controlled or substantially financed d. Non-Government organisation substantially financed.
15. The whole of the Right to Information Act revolves around the Public Authority to ensure the efficient operationof the Govt.
16. The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams is a Single Religious Institution which is governed by the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987. The Preamble to the said Act brings out that this Act is to consolidate and amend the law relating to the administration and governance of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
17. The Chapter xiv of the AP Charitable & Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act specifically applies to Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams. Nowhere in the said Endowments Act, it is said that this Act is brought out to establish or constitute the Religious Institutions and Endowments which is a very essential ingredient to fall into the definition of Pubic Authority under Right to Information Act. On the contrary, it is very specifically said in the preamble to the said Act that the Endowments Act is only for administration and governance of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Even in Section 95(2) of the Endowments Act it reads that these provisions of the Act shall apply to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams which shall be constituted in to a single Religious Institution for the purpose of inclusion of the list published in Section 6. Further the constitutional protection is available to Religious Institutions which are independent autonomous bodies and not established or constituted by the Government.
18. In a nut shell the Endowments Act do not establish or constitute a Charitable and Religious Institution but it is brought only for administering and for governing the said institutions. In such scenario the extension of Public Information Act to the religious institutions governed by Endowments Act appears to be remote on the basis of the definition given for the Public Authority in the Right to Information Act. The reading of the preamble of the Right to Information Act also appears its applicability on religious institutions like TTD to be remote, since TTD is administered and governed by the State government by appointing Trust Board members and in-turn the Trust Board shall function as an autonomous body.
19. Further, i the High Court or Kerala in W.P.No.30470/2008 d.t.11.03.2011, it was decided that temples and their offices are not established or constituted by or under the Constitution of India or by or under any other law made by, either the parliament or a State Legislature. They are also not established or constituted by notification issued or order made by any Government. They are not bodies owned by any Government. The fact that some of them are notified or listed temples in terms of the provisions or the HR & CE Act does not made them institutions established or constituted by or under any law or notification or order issued by any Government.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 37
20. Right to Information Act, 2005 under section 2(h) ....Managing or dealing with funds collected from public is not, by itself, statutory indicia to classify any authority or body or institution as a public authority under the provisions of the Right to Information Act. There is substantial difference between the concept of funds raised by collection from public contribution and funds raised by collection from public contribution and funds provided by the appropriate Government. The quality of funds generated by collection from public can never be treated as part of funds provided by the appropriate Government. Therefore, a clear distinction has to be maintained between those two concepts and every temple or institution in relation to the affairs of which funds are collected from the public cannot by that reasons alone, be brought within the definition of "Public authority"under section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act which applies to establishments which are substantially funded, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government. Whether a temple is a public temple or not decisive.
21. ...... (9 is missing, perhaps by mistake)
22. Again in the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh in WP No.6560 of 2012, the applicability of the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 to all the Charitable Hindu Religious and Endowment institutions has been suspended.
23. As per the section 2(28) of the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987, "Tirumala-Tirupathi Devasthanams"
means the temples specified in the First schedule and the endowments and properties thereof and shall include the educational institutions and properties thereof and shall include the educational institutions and other institutions specified in the Second schedule and the endowments and properties thereof and Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams shall be deemed to be constituted into a single religious institution for the purpose of this Act. Hence, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams is a religious institution which is also carrying out charitable activities, as it ay be appreciated that any religious activity includes charity.
24. Every religious denomination or any section thereof has the right to manage its religious affairs, establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purpose; and own, acquire and administer properties of all kinds as enshrined in Indian Constitution. In other words, every religious institution has right to manage its religious affairs which includes its religious activities, its income & expenditure, Assets & Liabilities and kept them secure as it relates to their specific Religious Institution only. They are in no way has any relationship with Public Activity or interest. It may be appreciated that any Religious denomination Hindu, Muslaman or Christian may not be willing to share its information with the public other than what is warranted and requires to be shared to them. In other words, these religious institutions are complying all Statutory Laws all the time and also the freedom given under the Article 26 of the Indian Constitution.
13. In this regard, Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Bhanunni Vs. Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admn) Dept (ILR 2011(2) Kerala 237, 2011(2) KLT 312, held as follows:
"The temples and their offices are not established or constituted by or under the Constitution of India or by or under any other law made by, either the Parliament or a State Legislature. They are also not established or constituted by notification issued or order made by any Government. They are not bodies owned by any Government. The fact that some of them are notified or listed temples in terms of the CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 38 provisions of the HR & CE Act does not make them institutions established or constituted by or under any law or notification or order issued by any Government. Insofar as the question of control is concerned, while the Government has the power to supersede the Malabar Devaswom Board, it cannot substitute itself for the Malabar Devaswom Board and it cannot be the Malabar Devaswom Board. The Governmental control, it any, as part of the revisional power or otherwise, is only statutory control, the exercise of which always depends upon the existence of the jurisdictional facts which wo9uld trigger the exercise of such statutory control. Such statutory controls which are regulatory or even adjudicatory in nature, do not in any manner, confer on the Government such control as would transform the temples and their offices as administrative units or offices of the Malabar Devaswom Board which is a statutory body; juristic person with perpetual succession and common seal. Having regard to the power of the Malabar Devaswom Board and the Commissioner to frame any scheme in relation to any Hindu public religious and charitable institution or endowment to which the HR & CE Act applies, such authority and the power of supervision or control by the Commissioner or Malabar Devaswom Board is strictly confined in the provisions of the HR & CE Act, limited and regulated by jurisdictional facts in conformity with a regulatory statute. That is not a power to control, but one only to regulate."
14. Again, on the basis of the judgement, a letter sent by the Commissioner of Endowments to all religious institutions in respect of applicability of Right to Information Act to all religious Institutions in the State has been stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has also suspended the order under the Right to Information Act requiring Hathi Ramji Mutt which is covered under the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Act to give certain information. (Case No.19399/2011). Since the applicability of the Right to Information Act to Religious Institution is sub judice.
It is regretted to inform that, the information sought by you cannot be given under the circumstances explained above.
In the service of Lord Venkateswara Signed 17-11-12 Executive Engineer-VIII Public Information Officer Copy submitted to the Nodal Officer (RTI Act)/Spl. Gr. Dy. Exe.Officer(G), TTD, Tirupati for kind information Copy submitted to the Dev. Law Officer, TTD, Tirupati for kind information Copy submitted to the Chief Engineer, TTD, Tirupati for kind information. Copy submitted to the Superintending Engineer-II, TTD, Tirupati for kind information Copy to file.
Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh in WP No.6560 of 2012, Hathi Ramji Mutt which is covered under the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Act to give certain information. (Case No.19399/2011).
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 39
Annexure 4
Under Certificate of Posting
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
REVENUE (ENDTS-III)DEPARTMENT
Letter No.15337/Endts.III/A1/2010-2 Dated 26-4-2010 From The Joint Secretary to Government & Public Information Officer, Revenue (Endts.III) Department AP Secretariat Hyderabad To The Public Information Officer, O/o the Executive Officer Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Tirupati (w.e.) Sir, Sub: RTI Act, 2005 - Application of Sri BKSR Iyyangar Eluru West Godavari Dist Forwarded for furnishing of information-
Ref: Application of Sri BKSR Iyyangar West Godavari District dt. 27-10-2009 received through General Administration (PAGM) Dept. UO Note. No.10037/PAGB.I/10-1, dt.1-4-2010 received through Revenue (IOC) Dept. UO Note No.15337/IOC/2010, dt.8.4.2010 I am to forward herewith the application of Sri B.K.S.R. Iyyangar, Eluru in original for furnishing of information direct to the applicant as per the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 without fail.
Yours faithfully, Sd/-
Joint Secretary to Govt & Public Information Officer Copy to: Sri B.K.S.R. Iyyangar, Journalist, 24B-10-27, Raghavachary Street RR Peta, Eluru 534002 with a request to obtain the information from the said public authority as information sought for is not available with this Department.
Signed
SECTION OFFICER
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 40
Annexure 5
Prof. P. Chenna Reddy, Director, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Hyderabad wrote to the appellant on 22.11.2011-
i) With reference to the subject cited, it is to inform you that this office has deputed a team of officers consisting of four members including Deputy Directors, Assistant Directors as per request of the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam to examine the ornaments of Lord Venkatesvara in connection with the identification of the donations particularly Ornaments donated by Sri Krishna Devaraya, who visited 7 times from 1509 A.D. to 1521 A.D. during his tenure. The team of officers verified the ornaments available at Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam Treasury and other Temples under the Jurisdiction of Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam for a period of nearly 20 days and submitted a report to this office.
ii) The report submitted by the Committee is herewith enclosed for your information. However it is concluded that no Ornament is tallied with any of the Ornaments donated by the great Vijayanagar Kind |Sri Krishna Devaraya to the Lord Venkatesvara as described in the inscriptions engraved on the walls of the Lord Venkatesvara Temple at Tirumala.
iii) Further it is to inform that a joint inspection was conducted by the officials from ASI Archaeology & Museums, Survey & Land Records and District Revenue Authorities, to identify the illegal occupations nearly and within the monuments. Copy of the report is herewith enclosed.
iv) Regarding the encroachment in & around monuments at Penugonda, it is to inform that information regarding the issuing of notices to 400 encroachers in 100 mtrs & 2,225 encroachers in regulated zone are with A.S.I, Hyderabad Circle.
v) Regarding the encroachments in and around Gaganmahal a protected monument of this Department only one complaint was received and notice to this effect has already been served to encroacher.
vi) Copies of the minutes of joint meetings between District officials and officials from A.S.I, Director of Archaeology & Museums, Revenue Authority and Land & Survey record Authorities are with the District Collector, Ananthapur.
Sd/- Prof. P. Chenna Reddy Director Encl: 1. Detailed Report on Ornaments and articles in T.T.D.
2. Inspection Report on Penukonda.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 41 Annexure 6
A brief report on Physical verification of jewellery of Lord Venkatesvara, Tirumala Tirupati, 2010 A team was constituted by the Director (i.e. Dr. B. Subrahmanyam Deputy Director (Retd), Sri J. Vijay Kumar Deputy director (Epy) three Assistant Directors including local Assistant Director namely, Sir P. Brahmachary, Sri G. V. Ratnam and Sri P. Venkataramana) to examine the ornaments and Jewellery of Lord Venkateswara donated by Sri Krishnadevaraya (A.D. 1509-A.D. 1529) Vijayanagara Emperor who was a staunch devotee of Lord Venkatesvara, as per epigraphs engraved on the temple walls of the Tirumala. Accordingly Sri J. Vijay Kumar Deputy Director (Epy), Sri P. Brahmachary, Sri G. V. Ratnam and Sir P. Venkataramana visited Tirumala on 24.07.2010 and met the Executive Officer and the Joint Executive Officer and discussed about the modalities to be followed for conducting physical verification of ornaments and Jwellery along with the registers.
The Committee has decided to verify ornaments of the Lord Venkatesvaras which are presently decorating the Lord and also ornaments kept in the Treasury which are not being used presently due to damage/breakage and other reasons, as informed by the Joint Executive Officer and as well as Executive Officer of the Tirumala - Tirupati Devasthanam. In view of the above, they were requested to make all available records right from the beginning i.e. transfer of Administrative powers from the Mahants to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam. It is seen that the records are being maintained by Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam only from 1952 onwards. Prior to that no records are damaged, ornaments donated ornaments etc., the temple of Sri Govindarja swamy temple at Tirupati, Alivelumangapuram temple at Tiruchanur, Srinivasa manaapuram temple near Chandragiri, Vedanarayana swamy temple at Nagulapuram, Kalyana Venkatesvara swamy temple at Narayanavanam which are under the control of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam so as to prepare a consolidated report on this issue. Accordingly the Executive Officer agreed to our proposal and made necessary arrangement to examine the Jewellery of the other said temples. The committee visited all the above said temples, as per the registers maintained by the respective temple authorities.
On 24.8.2010, the team also visited the Hati Ram Bhawaji Mutt [previously administered by the Tirumala Tirupati Devastanam from 1840 to 1933] and conducted physical verification of the Jewellery which are presently under the custody of Hathiramjee Mutt Trust in the presence of Endowment Joint Commissioner and Vigilance Officer, Assistant Commissioner both at Tirupati and Tirumala. On enquiry it was informed that around 250 Jewellery items of Hathiramjee Mutt are presently under the custody of district court, Chittor which are kept at State Bank of India Tirupati and State Bank of India, Chandragiri Bank lockers, because of some dispute in between the two Mahants.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 42 When the committee discussed the matter with the Executive Officer and the Joint Executive Officer, they told us that the same will be intimated to us soon after obtaining permission from the court.
During our physical verification of ornaments both at Tirumala and Treasury (Administrative building Tirupati) of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam noticed a good number of ancient gold coins particularly of Vijayanagara Period, Muslim period, French British, Portugal, Dutch, European, colonial state coins and local, princely state consist of antique and historic value. Further the team has identified a number of gold coins of Sri Krishnadevaraya including Umamahesvara type, Balakrishna Type, Venkateswara Type, Gandaberunda Type coins in the Treasury of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam. The matter was brought to the notice of the Executive Officer and the Joint Executive Officer and advised them to take up the process of bringing out publications after decipherment systematically and chronologically taking the assistance of the experts for the benefit of scholars and students. It is also suggested to display all coins in the Museums, at Tirumala.
Though the antique jewelleries are found at Tirumala and at Treasury, Tirupati they are not tallied with Jewellery items donated by Sri Krishnadevaraya per inscriptional evidences. However it was noticed that a crown which was remodeled ion 1945 by Devasthanam authority closely tallies with the description of a crown donated by Sri Krishnadevaraya. Generally, it is the practice adopted by the temple authorities to add or remove certain pieces, while remaking Jewellery items perhaps, it was happened in the case of Vajrakiritam donated by Shri Krishnadevaraya.
A NOTE ON RECENT VIOLATIONS BY TTD AS STATED BY THE PETITIONER SRI BKSR AYYANGAR HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
The history of Sri Venkateswara Temple at Tirumala goes back to Pallava period as per the historical records through the literary references could be found from ancient Tamil literature. Cholas and Vijayanagara rulers have made several donations to the Temple evident by the inscriptions in replete over the outer walls of garbhagriha and other mandapas. Sri Krishnadevaraya the celebrated king of Vijayanagara has paid seven visits to the Temple and made several donations in the form of gold and jewels. The inscribed bronze images of Sri Krishnadevaraya and two consorts Tirumaladevi and Chinnadevi are still stand at the Temple premises. Achyutaraya, Tirumalaraya and Rangaraya have contributed to the temple in many ways ex: by constructing mandapas and other structures. Nayakas, Marathas and East India Company with the help of Hathiramji matt were among the other patrons of the temple.
REQUIREMENTS:
Tirumala Temple is visited by 50,000 devotees per a day on an average. During festivities and utsavas it reaches to four lakhs. The regular rituals performed daily, weekly or yearly involve a separate administrative, ritualistic and publicity set up. The visiting devotees require shelter, boarding and security apart from providing basic amenities around the temple complex. These amenities may intervene with the AM & ASR Act, 1958 and Amendment and Validation, 2010.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 43 Many other factors which may require attention....preparation and distribution of free prasadam and laddu in large quantities require storage and kitchen facilities Also ghee and other ingredients may cause accumulation of grease on the walls of potu/madapalli (temple kitchen). Security of the temple due to the threats from terrorists also needs mention. On various stages visitors and staff required to undergo security checks and all modern equipment/gadgets are to be placed at various stages. Introduction of queue system with basic amenities in cellars itself is an addition to the ancient temple complex. The management of the darsan for the devotees in large numbers itself is a difficult task. It is needless to recommend a separate professional body to look after the facilities and requirements of the temple. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam is doing commendable work in dealing with all aspects of the temple administration.
VIOLATIONS:
But there are many occasions where T.T.D. has gone against archaeological norms. Ex. Dismantling the historical thousand pillared mandapam, proposals to fix gold sheets under Ananta Swarnamayam scheme to the outer walls of garbhagriha where inscriptions are existing (ASI has filed counter affidavit opposing the proposal), taking up the conservation works to the structures in modern process etc. Apart from the Devasthanam Trust Board it is quite essential to have an archaeological wing to review and recommend the suitable procedure in view of archaeological norms wherever necessary.
OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS:
1. Keeping in view of the archaeological, epigraphical and historical background and cultural significance of the temple, it may be considered for the protection by ASI as a monument of national importance.
2. Any activity which is related to the archaeological aspect may be informed to the Archaeological Survey of India and Department of Archaeology and Museums, Andhra Pradesh to review the pros and cons as well as the archaeological norms thoroughly and recommend the necessary inputs for the execution.
3. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam may provide a space for archaeology by nominating the Director General or his/her representative of ASI and Department of Archaeology and Museums as a member in the Trust Board which takes policy decisions for the benefit of devotees and the Temple to prevent any action violating archaeological/heritage norms at the policy level itself.
4. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam may provide the fund for protecting cultural heritage and monuments which are in need of attention.
5. The archaeological wing is to be adequately equipped with technical team headed by a Director. The decisions for the betterment of the facilities for the devotees are to be reviewed there only to avoid delay. Since, a Museum also exists behind the main temple all branches are to be brought under the archaeological wing. This may solve the problem of violating the laws to some extent.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 44 Annexure 7 January 22, 2011, 10:36 PM IST
Tirupati, January 22: The Justice Wadhwa Committee, set up by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams for verification of the ornaments in the Venkateswara temple on Tirumala and in other temples managed by the TTD, said that no item was lost and that it was fully satisfied with the system in vogue for protection and maintenance of the ornaments.
The committee, headed by retired Supreme Court judge justice Wadhwa, retired supreme court judge, was set up on January 4 last year. It submitted its 137-page report, including 22 recommendations, to TTD Specified Authority chairman J Satyanarayana today.
The committee members as well as justice Jagannatha Rao, who was appointed by the state government to go into the security system for the safety of the temple ornaments in TTD temples and also verified the jewels simultaneously, was also present during the submission of the Wadhwa report.
Speaking to mediapersons, justice Wadhwa said that the committee did not find anything wrong in the TTD security system adopted for the protection of the temple jewellery as well as its maintenance. "We have suggested to the TTD to make use of modern technology to have a more transparent and foolproof system for the protection of jewels," he added.
Justice Jagannatha Rao said the Tiruvabharanam register, being maintained in Tirumala temple since 1952, had no mention of any temple ornaments received from Vijayanagar emperor Krishnadevaraya. After the identification of jewellery (items) at random in the lockers in the temple at Tirumala and other temples and also the treasury were the ornaments were in safe custody, the committee concluded that all the items were intact, he said.
After the examination of other aspects including assaying the quality and originality of the precious and antique ornaments by experts including gemologists and from the government mint to where the TTD gold jewellery was sent for conversion into pure gold bars, the committee was fully satisfied with TTD's measures for the security of the ornaments and saw no tampering in any form or manner, he added.
Committee coordinator PVRK Prasad explained that as per the Tiruvabharanam register there were 370 ornaments made of gold and precious stones, both big and small. Of these, 100 adorn the main idol in the sanctum sanctorum and 70 adorn the processional idols. The rest are kept in lockers. The committee verified all the items in the lockers and also the ornaments on the idols at random and in a phased manner and they perfectly matched with the list in the Tiruvabharanam register, he added.
There was no register for the ornaments in the temple before 1952, except the information of handing over the jewels by a priest in 1939, which was tallied with the 1952 register. The temple was under the control of Mahants from 1840 to 1933 and from then under the endowments department till the creation of TTD board, Prasad explained.
TTD executive officer IYR Krishna Rao said that the report vindicated the TTD ensuring the safety of the God's ornaments and also dispelled the doubts or misconception over the protection of jewels.
CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 45 "It will also help to sustain the image of TTD, which received a setback following adverse reports at the national level on the safety of ornaments," he said.
The Wadhwa committee suggested a hi-fi internal security in view of the increased terror perception across the country, R Prabhakar Rao, another member, said.
In addition to the verification by financial adviser and chief accounts officer(FA&CAO), the committee also wanted verification by a special team to be set up and also by a team of archakas of the jewels on the main deity as others are not allowed to enter the sanctum sanctorum often for surprise verification.
The members said in one voice that they were amazed at the register containing every minute details of the ornaments, including any damage or anything lost and also the recovery of the cost from the concerned, and also the meticulous care taken by the staff for maintaining the record or the ornaments.
https://archive.siasat.com/news/wadhwa-panel-finds-all-ttd-jewels-intact-158351/ Accessed on 30th July 2018 CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 46 Annexure 8 HC seeks details of Tirumala temple property Tribune News Service Hyderabad, August 4 The affairs of Tirumala temple, the country's richest shrine, have come under judicial scrutiny with the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking details of its properties including gold and jewellery donated by devotees over the years.
The shrine has huge reserves of gold and jewellery, estimated to be worth over Rs 55,000 crore. The details of ornaments and assets have not been made public so far. However, according to unofficial estimates, the temple treasury has over 12 tonne of gold, jewellery, coins and other ornaments.
The court order seeks to lift the veil of secrecy over the temple properties. Acting on a public interest litigation (PIL), a Division Bench of the court, comprising Justice G Raghuram and Justice Ramesh Ranganathan directed the board of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD), which manages the affairs of temple, to make an inventory of all properties, including jewellery, belonging to Lord Venkateswara and other temples under the TTD's administrative control and submit it to the court. The court ordered that the details be submitted within three weeks.
The orders were passed based on a petition filed by B Govinda Reddy belonging to Nellore. The petitioner raised fears over the safety of the jewellery in the wake of disappearance of some cold coins from the temple treasury about three years ago.
He wanted the inventory of all properties of Lord Venkateswara and other deities in the temples managed by the TTD be made public.
On its part, the state government contended that there was no need for a separate inventory as it had already constituted a commission chaired by retired judge Justice M Jagannadham to probe the alleged misappropriation of gold dollars belonging to the temple.
The petitioner's counsel S Ramachandra Rao told the court that there was no proper maintenance of the records for jewellery. As per the present practice of the TTD Board, the entire treasury is under the supervision of a single official which is against the basic concept of safety.The court wondered as to why the temple administration was reluctant to make a comprehensive inventory of the jewellery.
Meanwhile, TTD chairman DK Adikesavulu Naidu said the temple board would honour the court's directive and submit a list of properties, assets and ornaments within the stipulated time frame.
The tradition of gold offerings to the Lord goes back to several centuries. The ruler of Vijayanagara empire Krishnadevaraya had visited the temple seven times during the period 1509-1539 and made huge offerings including a diamond-studded crown. Since then, the rulers of various dynasties made gold donations to the temple.
With annual income in excess of Rs 800 crore, Tirumala is considered the richest temple in the country.https://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090805/main7.htm CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 47 CIC/ALSOI/A/2018/124485 Page 48