Mahant is the manager of the property of the Matha who was also the head of the institution.
Normally Mahant was the Sanyasi or Branihachari but in some Mathas there was a permission to marry. A female Hindu can also become a Mahant but she is incompetent to perform the spiritual and religious rituals or acts.
Image Source: i.ytimg.com
Position of Mahant:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Mahant acts in two ways; one, as religious Guru and the other like a Shibait of idol. He is also the manager of the property. He is the head of the institution. The performance of religious acts, worshipping of idols and the execution of the traditional religious activities are the responsibilities of the Mahant. All the properties of the institution vest in him.
He keeps the property of the institution as a trustee. Such view has been expressed by the Supreme Court in the case—Krishna Singh v. Mathaura Ahir, According to the court—”A Matha is an institutional sanctum presided over by a superior, who combines in himself the dual office of being the religious or spiritual head of the particular cult or religious fraternity and of the manager of the secular properties of the institution of the Matha.
The property belonging to a Matha is in fact attached to the office of the Mahant and passed by inheritance to no one who does not fill the office. The head of the Matha, as such, is not a trustee in the sense in which that term is generally understood, but in legal contemplation he has an estate for life in its permanent endowments and an absolute property in the income derived from the offerings of his followers, subject only to the burden of maintaining the institution.
Mahant can use and retain the usufruct so long he remains on the chair (gaddi) of Mahant. He possesses very wide powers pertaining to the property over which he is the Mathaadipati (Mahant) the only restriction upon his right is that he cannot spend the property for an immoral purpose or for his personal use.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
He is only the Manager and guardian of the idol and institution. In any case he has only the right of use of the property. The mode of use depends upon the tradition. He is neither trustee of the property in English sense nor in any case the property vest in him or gets transferred to him. Still he is responsible like a trustee with respect to the administrative powers relating to the property.
The duty of Mahant is not only to manage the Matha but also the propagation of the spiritual and religious knowledge. For this he arranges religious discourses and also executes the guru-pupil tradition for the dissemination of the religious knowledge of its sect. Mahant’s post is not heritable property because the nature of this office is different.
When the Matha’s property goes in the hands of a trespasser, the Mahant for the recovery thereof can file a suit and spend money for its recovery and can also mortgage the property. He can go to the extent of selling of the property in case of legal necessity. In all such cases the court has held the acts of the Mahant to be intra vires.
Mahant is the manager of institution and idol and is also its guardian. He represents the Akhara. He can sue on behalf of Akhara and can also contest a suit on behalf of Akhara. In real sense he is the person who has the right to sue for the recovery of the lost property of the Matha.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The devolution of the office of Mahant is based upon the traditions of the Matha. The successor is appointed by the Mathaadish himself during his lifetime. The office of the Mahant and the properties of the Matha, both are indivisible. Sometimes the heir is elected by the followers of the Matha and the pupils. But the right to appoint the successor if vested in the Mahant is not a transferable right.
The Supreme Court had held in Amar Prakash v. Prakashanand that a person, not a chela but accepted as such could be validly appointed as a successor; for successorship it is necessary that he must be disciple. The mode of succession to office of the Mahant is sometimes determined by the founder of the institution himself.
Where such a right is recognised in a Matha, the appointment is not required to be recognised by the fraternity. It is also not necessary that the co-religious Matha must grant approval to such a right.
Extinction of the post of Mahant:
In the following circumstances the Mahant’s post gets extinct—
(i) Death of the Mahant;
(ii) Waiver of the post of Mahant;
(iii) On developing some incapability;
(iv) Mismanagement of the Matha, or immoral life.
Deva Sampatti:
Deva Sampatti literally means property of the Devata i.e., property of some deity, so the deva sampatti refers to that property which has been dedicated to the devata or has been given in the name of the Dharma. It is different from the property of Matha. Property given to the Mathas is related to the Mathaadhis or the post of Matha and the property devolves in favour of such person in succession who holds the post. In certain sense it is a trust property which is brought for the use of the institution.