In the Shirur Mutt case of 1954, the Court ruled, “….what constitutes the essential part of a religion is primarily to be ascertained with reference to the doctrines of that religion itself.” 2. Ever thereafter, the judgment in Shirur Mutt has remained the focal point of constitutional discussion on religious freedoms.Why is the Sabarimala temple case referred to a 7-judge bench?
The Supreme Court’s five-judge constitution bench has decided to refer the Sabarimala temple case, clubbed with other 3 pending cases broadly related to the rights of women in the sphere of religion, to a larger 7-judge Bench. This leads the apex court into potentially dangerous and conflicting territories.Is Section 76(1) of the Madras Act void?
Section 76 (1) of the Act is void as the provision relating to the payment of annual contribution contained in it is a tax and not a fee and so it was beyond the legislative competence of the Madras State Legislature to enact such a provision.