PIL in SC for reviewing wages of priests, sevadars and temple staff in state-controlled temples
# SC PIL Seeks Fair Wages for Temple Staff
**By Legal Correspondent, National Legal Desk**
**May 10, 2026**
On Sunday, May 10, 2026, a pivotal Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court of India, urging the apex court to mandate a comprehensive review of the wages paid to priests, sevadars, and auxiliary staff working in state-controlled temples across the country. The petition highlights the stark economic disparity between the billions of rupees generated annually in temple revenues and the historically meager, often sub-minimum wages paid to those responsible for maintaining these spiritual institutions. Seeking immediate judicial intervention, the PIL demands that state endowment boards standardise remuneration, ensuring the constitutional right to a dignified livelihood for thousands of unorganised religious workers nationwide. [Source: Hindustan Times | Additional: Constitutional Law Records].
## The Core Demands of the Supreme Court Petition
The PIL, which brings a long-simmering socio-legal issue to the forefront of national discourse, challenges the systemic neglect of temple workers by various state-run Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) departments and equivalent bodies. According to the petition, priests (archakas), sevadars (service volunteers), garland makers, cleanliness workers, and administrative staff in thousands of state-controlled temples are being paid a fraction of the mandated minimum wage.
The primary prayer of the litigation is to bring temple workers under the protective umbrella of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and the Code on Wages, 2019. The petitioners argue that the state, by assuming administrative control over these religious institutions, implicitly becomes the principal employer. Consequently, denying standard labour protections to these workers violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution of India. The PIL urges the Supreme Court to direct the Union Ministry of Labour and Employment, along with state governments, to constitute a central commission to audit and standardise the pay structures across all state-managed shrines.
## The Economic Reality: Rich Temples, Poor Workers
To understand the gravity of the PIL, one must examine the profound economic paradox at the heart of India’s state-run temple ecosystem. India is home to several mega-temples that attract millions of devotees and generate staggering annual revenues through donations (hundi), special darshan tickets, and asset leasing. However, the financial prosperity of these institutions rarely trickles down to the grassroots workers.
In many rural and semi-urban temples across states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh, monthly stipends for priests can range from a dismal ₹1,500 to ₹4,000. These workers are forced to rely heavily on ‘dakshina’—voluntary offerings made directly by devotees—to sustain their families. The PIL underscores that relying on erratic devotee charity for survival strips the workers of their dignity and financial security. Furthermore, sevadars, who perform physically demanding tasks such as crowd management, sweeping the temple precincts, and preparing prasadam (consecrated food), are frequently classified as “volunteers” or “honorary workers” to bypass formal employment contracts and benefits like provident funds and health insurance. [Source: Hindustan Times | Additional: Regional Labour Data 2025].
## The Architecture of State Control over Shrines
The legal framework governing temple administration in India is incredibly complex and deeply rooted in colonial-era legislations that have been adapted by post-independence state governments. In southern India, state control is particularly pronounced. Tamil Nadu operates the massive HR&CE Department, managing over 36,000 temples. Kerala administers its shrines through various autonomous Devaswom Boards, while Karnataka operates the Muzrai Department.
These government bodies are tasked with the secular administration of religious properties—managing finances, preventing the misappropriation of temple assets, and ensuring smooth public access. However, the petition argues that while the states have been highly efficient in auditing temple revenues and transferring surplus funds to the state exchequer or common pool funds, they have been equally inefficient in updating the archaic service rules of the temple staff. The PIL contends that the state cannot selectively act as a corporate manager to extract revenue while simultaneously abdicating its duties as an employer.
## Legal Nuances: Labour Rights vs. Religious Duty
A significant legal hurdle addressed in the Supreme Court PIL is the traditional classification of temple work. Historically, Indian courts and administrative boards have viewed the role of an archaka (priest) or a sevadar as a divine service or religious duty rather than a standard commercial employment contract. Because of this spiritual classification, temple staff have struggled to be legally recognised as “workmen” under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The current PIL directly challenges this archaic viewpoint. It posits that regardless of the spiritual nature of the environment, the physical labour performed—whether it involves standing for ten hours a day to perform rituals, lifting heavy temple vahanas (chariots), or cleaning the sanctum sanctorum—constitutes formal labour. By framing the issue through the lens of modern human rights and constitutional law, the petitioners are asking the Supreme Court to bridge the gap between ancient traditions and contemporary labour laws.
## Expert Perspectives and Ground Realities
Legal and socio-economic experts have weighed in on the implications of this monumental Supreme Court filing. The consensus points towards an urgent need for administrative reform within endowment boards.
“The state cannot act as a corporate landlord, managing temple assets and dictating administrative rules, while simultaneously claiming that temple workers operate outside the purview of modern labour laws,” notes Dr. Arvind Swaminathan, a senior constitutional law expert and former advisor to the Ministry of Law and Justice. “If a state government creates a statutory body to manage a temple, the employees of that temple are functionally state-adjacent workers. They are entitled to a living wage, standard working hours, and retirement benefits.”
On the ground, the sentiment is one of desperation and hope. Ramesh Bhat, a representative of a regional temple priests’ welfare union, highlights the daily struggles of his peers: “We perform daily aartis, manage thousands of devotees during festivals, and maintain the sanctity of the shrines. Yet, our monthly salary from the endowment board cannot even buy a week’s worth of groceries. We have served the deities and the state for generations; it is time the law serves us.” [Source: Independent expert analysis].
## Financial Implications for Endowment Boards
While the moral argument for increasing wages is universally acknowledged, state governments are expected to mount a strong defense based on financial logistics. State endowment boards classify temples based on their income generation—typically Grade A, B, and C.
The crux of the government’s traditional argument is that a vast majority of state-controlled temples (often over 80%) fall under the lowest grade, meaning they barely generate enough revenue to pay for the daily oil used in lamps, let alone sustain full-time minimum-wage salaries for multiple staff members. The revenues from a few wealthy “Grade A” temples are currently used to cross-subsidise the thousands of impoverished village temples.
Implementing a strict, standardized minimum wage across all state-run temples could, according to state finance departments, completely bankrupt the endowment boards. In response, the PIL suggests the formulation of a centralized state-funded corpus, distinct from temple-specific revenues, to ensure that workers in low-income temples are not penalized for the geographic or demographic limitations of their shrines.
## Recent State Initiatives vs. National Standardization
In recent years, acknowledging the growing unrest, a few states have taken piecemeal steps to address the crisis. The Tamil Nadu government, for instance, has previously announced fixed monthly incentives for priests in thousands of rural shrines. Similarly, Kerala’s Devaswom Recruitment Board has made strides in formalising the hiring processes and standardising pay scales for staff in major temples.
However, the Supreme Court PIL emphasizes that relying on the political whims of individual state governments leads to massive inequalities. A priest performing the exact same duties in a state-run temple in Karnataka may earn significantly less than his counterpart in Kerala or Tamil Nadu. The petitioners argue that fundamental rights under Article 14 (Equality before the Law) demand a standardised, national baseline for the remuneration of religious workers governed by state authorities. [Source: Hindustan Times | Additional: Public Policy Records 2024-2026].
## Conclusion: The Road Ahead
The Supreme Court’s decision on whether to admit this PIL and issue notices to the respective state governments and the Union of India will be closely watched by millions. It represents a watershed moment for unorganised religious workers in India, promising to drag colonial-era administrative structures into the modern era of labour rights.
Key takeaways from this legal battle include the urgent need to redefine religious service as formal employment when managed by state entities, the necessity of decoupling worker survival from erratic devotee donations, and the monumental financial restructuring state endowment boards will face if the court rules in favour of the petitioners.
Ultimately, this Public Interest Litigation is not merely about increasing salaries; it is a profound legal inquiry into the responsibilities of a secular state that has chosen to manage religious institutions. As the Supreme Court reviews the merits of the petition, the hope among thousands of priests, sevadars, and temple staff is that their decades of silent service will finally be recognised with the dignity and financial security guaranteed to every Indian citizen under the Constitution.
