Article 26 of the Indian Constitution

Article 26 of the Indian Constitution provides right to religion to individuals as well as community. It imparts collective right to group to manage their religious affairs. 

Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs 

Article 26: Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right-

(a) To establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;

(b) To manage its own affairs in matters of religion;

(c) To own and acquire movable and immovable property; and

(d) To administer such property in accordance with law.

Religious Denomination 

The right guaranteed by Article 25 is an individual right while the right guaranteed by Article 26 is the right of 'organised body' like the religious denomination or any section thereof. 

Denomination

Collection of individuals, classed together with under the same name. 

Case- SP Mittal 🆚 Union of India, 1983 SC

Held - The word 'religious denomination in Article 26 must take their colour from the word' religion' and therefore, it must also satisfy three conditions:

i) It must be a collection of individuals who have a system of beliefs which they regard as conducive to their spiritual will being, that is, common faith;

ii) It must have a common organisation, and

iii) It must be designated by a distinctive name. 

Case- Commr, HRE 🆚 Lt. Swamiar, 1954 SC

Held- The various philosophies governing the Hindu society, such as Advaitas, Dwaitas Vishishtadwaitas and Saivites can also termed as denomination. 

Right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purpose - 

Under clause (a) of Article 26, every religious and denomination has right to establish and maintain for religious and charitable purposes. The word "establish and maintain" in article 26(a) must be read together and therefor,  it is only those institution which religious denomination establishes which can claim to maintain it. 

Case- Azeez Basha 🆚 Union of India, 1968 SC

Held - The Aligarh University was not established by the Muslim minority and therefore it could not claim the right to 'maintain' it. It was established under the statute passed by the Parliament.

Right to manage 'matters of religion' 

Under Article 26(b), religious denomination or organisation is free to manage its own 'matter of religion'. The State cannot interfere in the exercise of this unless they counter to public order, health or morality.

Case- Mohd. Hanif Quareshi 🆚 State of Bihar, 1958 SC

Held - The Court has the right to determine whether a particular rite or ceremony is regarded as essential by the tenets of a particular religion. 

Taking over management of secular activities of temple-

Case- Bira Kishore Dev 🆚 State of Orissa, 1964 SC

The Shri Jagganath Temple Act took the management of secular activities of Temple from the Raja of Puri and vested it in committee constituted under the Act. 

Held- The Court held the Act valid as it did not affect the religious aspect. 

Breaking of coconut and performing Pooja chanting Mantras and Sutras in State functions-

Case- Atheist Society of India 🆚 Govt. of AP, 1992 SC

The petitioner, Atheist Society of India, trade for issuing a Brit of mandamus directing the state government to prohibit breaking of coconut performing of Pooja, chanting of mantras or sutras of different religions at State functions. 

Held- The Andhra Pradesh HC rejected their prayer and held- These activities has been a part of the Indian tradition and are meant to invoke the blessing of almighty for the success of the project undertaken.

Right to administer property owned by denomination-

Under clauses (c) and (d) of Article 26, a religious denomination nation has the right to acquire and own property and to administer such property in accordance with law. 

Case- SP Mittal 🆚 Union of India, 1983 SC

Held- The right of a religious denomination to manage its property has been placed on a different footing from the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. The former is a fundamental right which can't be taken away except on ground mentioned in Article 25, while the latter can be regulated by law, that is, it can be abridged or taken away by a valid law. 

Case- Rati Lal 🆚 State of Bombay, 1954 SC

Held- A law which took away the right of administration altogether from religious denomination and vested it in other secular authority was held to be voilative of the right guaranteed by article 26(d). 

Limitation on the Right-

Case- Subramaniam Swamy(Dr.) 🆚 State of Tamil Nadu, 2015 SC

Held- The rights conferred by article 26 are subject to the limitation as prescribed under Article 26 of the Constitution and not subject to any provision of Part III of the Constitution. 

                                     - Anjali Singh & 

                                       Deepak Kumar 

                             (University of Allahabad)