The amendment has drawn sharp criticism over alleged legal violations, particularly concerning non-compliance with existing laws, judicial rulings, and established procedures.
Published Jun 01, 2025 | 8:00 AM ⚊ Updated Jun 01, 2025 | 8:00 AM
CM Chandrababu Naidu.
Synopsis: The Andhra Pradesh government has amended rules to allow temple lands to be leased to reputed charitable organisations for up to 33 years, aiming to support public welfare activities. The move has sparked sharp criticism from opposition parties and civil society, who allege legal violations and warn that long-term leases without competitive bidding could undermine temple finances and cultural heritage.
In a move that could trigger controversy, the Andhra Pradesh government has amended the rules governing immovable properties under the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments.
Under the new amendment, temple lands can now be leased for up to 33 years.
The change was formalised through a final notification issued under GO Ms No. 139 on 30 May. This follows a preliminary notification published earlier on 2 May 2025.
The notification specifically amends Rule 4 of the 2003 Rules, adding two new sub-clauses that allow long-term leasing to reputed charitable organisations.
It also introduces provisions for lease termination if the organisation deviates from its stated objectives.
The GO was issued by V Vinay Chand, Secretary to the Government, Revenue (Endowments) Department. It sets out the eligibility criteria for long-term leases.
According to the GO, charitable organisations as defined under Section 2(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (Act No. 30 of 1987), are now eligible for leases or licences of immovable temple properties.
To qualify, organisations must have been engaged in non-profit charitable activities for at least 20 years prior to the application.
Leases or licences are to be granted through a public auction process.
However, in certain cases, the government may permit leases at reasonable rents or fees, provided the reasons are recorded in writing and the objectives of the organisation are duly considered.
The stated objective is to allow such bodies to pursue charitable goals without hindrance, with a focus on public welfare.
A termination clause has also been introduced. It empowers the competent authority to cancel leases or licences if the lessee fails to carry out the activities for which the lease was granted.
This is intended to ensure that temple properties are used in alignment with their original charitable purpose.
Following a review of public submissions received in response to the preliminary notification on 2 May, the government finalised the amendment. The changes were formally notified on 30 May 2025.
The amendment will come into force 30 days after its publication in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, providing a transition period for implementation.
According to the government, the 33-year lease cap is designed to balance long-term operational security for charitable bodies with the need for future governance flexibility.
In support of the amendment, the notification states, “it facilitates the continued pursuit of charitable objectives by reputed organizations, ensuring that endowment properties are utilized for the larger public welfare.”
The Endowments Department is expected to issue guidelines for effective implementation of the new rules.
The amendment has drawn sharp criticism over alleged legal violations, particularly concerning non-compliance with existing laws, judicial rulings, and established procedures.
The opposition, especially the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP), has accused the TDP-led government of using the policy to distribute temple lands as “political spoils” to favoured groups.
They allege that public interest and legal safeguards have been ignored, prompting vows of legal challenges aimed at reversing the move and protecting temple assets.
The Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, governs the management of temple properties.
Section 82 of the Act mandates that temple lands can be alienated – sold or leased – only through public auctions, to ensure transparency and maximise financial returns for the temple.
However, Government Order (GO Ms No. 139, dated 2 May 2025) allows leasing at nominal rates without auctions.
Critics argue this contravenes Section 82 and undermines the legal framework intended to safeguard temple properties.
The amendment is also seen as being at odds with the spirit of the Madras High Court’s guidelines on the alienation of temple lands.
These guidelines stress that temple properties should be leased or sold only when absolutely necessary and in the best interest of the temple – typically for financial needs or to support religious activities.
Further, any such transaction must be conducted through a transparent public auction to ensure fair market value and prevent undue influence or bias.
The process, according to these rulings, must involve rigorous oversight and proper documentation to protect temple interests.
The current policy, which permits long-term leases without competitive bidding, is therefore seen by opponents as violating judicial directives and opening the door to private negotiations that may underprice the land.
Critics further argue that the amendment could enable select organisations to gain control of temple lands worth thousands of crores without facing open competition. This, they warn, risks weakening the financial foundation of temples.
Opponents have described the move as a “cultural betrayal,” contending that temple lands are sacred public trusts meant to support religious and spiritual functions – not to be transferred to private hands under the pretext of charity.
Leasing such lands for extended periods, they argue, amounts to plundering spiritual assets and ignoring their religious significance.
The policy has also been criticised for reportedly lacking Cabinet approval and bypassing key legal safeguards.
Critics point to past court rulings – particularly those of the Madras High Court – which state that temple lands must only be alienated when absolutely necessary and that public auctions are essential to secure fair value.
They cite earlier controversies such as the attempted lease of 83 acres of Sadavarti Satram land during the TDP government’s 2014–19 tenure.
That lease was blocked through legal intervention and subsequently re-auctioned for a significantly higher value.
This precedent has fuelled concerns that the current amendment could lead to similar instances of mismanagement or preferential treatment.
The Endowments Department currently manages over 4.6 lakh acres of temple land across the state. However, only about 1 lakh acres are generating revenue. Nearly 87,000 acres are reportedly under encroachment.
Critics argue that allowing long-term leases without auctions could further erode temple finances, which depend on these assets for regular maintenance, religious rituals, and public services.
Further criticism – primarily from the opposition YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) – has focused on the claim that GO 139 was issued without the requisite approval from the state Cabinet.
This, they argue, constitutes a breach of administrative procedure, rendering the policy legally questionable.
The Endowments Department is mandated to operate under strict oversight, including approvals from higher authorities or the respective trust boards managing temple properties.
However, the policy is alleged to bypass these checks, effectively allowing the Commissioner of Endowments to negotiate leases directly.
Critics argue that such a move lacks transparency and violates statutory norms governing the administration of public religious trusts.
Temple lands, under the law, are considered assets of a public trust – held for the benefit of the deity and the devotees.
Leasing them for periods extending up to 33 years at below-market rates, and without competitive bidding, is being described as a potential breach of fiduciary duty.
Opponents contend that this could deny temples the financial returns necessary for maintenance and religious functions.
As a cautionary example, those opposing the amendment have pointed to a past legal precedent involving the Sadavarti Satram lands.
In 2017, the Andhra Pradesh High Court overturned an earlier lease of these lands due to violations of auction procedures.
The court had ordered a fresh auction after allegations of undervaluation and lack of transparency surrounding the 2016 auction, which had fetched ₹22.4 crore.
The re-auction, held in September 2017, brought in ₹60.30 crore, reinforcing concerns about the earlier process and validating the court’s intervention.
Sadavarti Satram is a charitable choultry affiliated with the Sri Amaralingeswara Swamy Temple in Amaravati, Guntur district. It holds approximately 83 acres of land in Kancheepuram district, Tamil Nadu.
An architect, Karthik Yellapragada, expressed scepticism over the government’s intentions in leasing temple lands.
Sharing the 2 May GO on X, he posted: “What is the definition of reputation? Who qualifies to be reputed (to become eligible for getting temple lands on lease)?”
Prof D AR Subrahmanyam, a member of the Devalaya Parirakshana Samiti, has voiced strong opposition to leasing temple lands to private institutions.
He believes the GO issued on 30 May will harm the interests of temples, stating that the government appears intent on leasing lands to private entities.
“Once lands are given to a private institution, it will be the last time that the temple would see them. The temple does not get much income either, as the lease amount would always be very paltry,” he said.
He argued that temple lands should be leased to private institutions only in rare cases and strictly for non-commercial purposes that serve the public good – such as hospitals, educational institutions for the poor, or the promotion of Hindu dharma.
“It is unfortunate that the BJP, which should be voicing its opposition to the move of the state government, has remained silent,” he added.
Subhrahmanyam called on the party to clarify its position, noting that such silence is inconsistent with its stated commitment to Hindu dharma, even though it is part of the TDP-led NDA government in the state.
Similar concerns were echoed by Rayalaseema Intellectual Forum coordinator M Purushottam Reddy.
“See what happened to Durga Temple lands in Vijayawada,” he added.
“They have been given on lease to Siddhartha Academy, and now it has no land of its own. It had to barter a part of its land somewhere with TTD to take a four-acre parcel of its land at the foothill of the temple.”
He stressed that if the original land had remained with the Durga Malleswara Swami Varla Devasthanam, the temple would not have been forced to negotiate land in exchange with the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD).
“Under no circumstances should prime land of any temple be given out on lease,” he said.
“Maybe the government could give leases, but for shorter durations, for temple lands which have been lying fallow or not being put to any use – but not prime land.”
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
