The Akali Dal should not deny autonomy to the Sikhs in Haryana to independently manage their gurdwaras in the state.

The issue of a separate gurdwara management committee for Haryana has returned to the religio-political discourse in Punjab following the revised submission made by the state government in the Supreme Court that it has no objection to the formation of Haryana Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee. The Punjab government had earlier opposed the Haryana government decision in the apex court when the chief minister was Parkash Singh Badal heading the Akali Dal-BJP government.

The Akali Dal submitted a memorandum to the state Governor on Friday seeking his intervention to reverse the decision of the state government. Party chief Sukhbir Singh Badal is reported to have accused Amarinder government of “conspiring to weaken Sikh institutions including the SGPC by supporting the idea of a separate gurdwara body for Haryana with the sole aim of fulfilling the anti-Sikh agenda of the Gandhi family”.

The controversial issue has both constitutional as well as political dimensions.

The decision of the Haryana government is rooted in the Punjab Re-organisation Act, 1966.

This Sikh Gurdwara Act under which the SGPC was constituted in 1925 the Punjab Legislative Council. The SGPC thus constituted covered entire Punjab minus the princely states. The jurisdiction of this Act was extended to these areas after the merger with Punjab during the post-partition period.

It was after merger of these territories with Punjab that the 1925 Act was amended by the Punjab Assembly in 1959 to provide voting rights to Sehajdharis.

The territorial jurisdiction of the SGPC first changed in 1947 with the partition of Punjab and again after the merger of princely states in the Indian region with the Punjab state.

The Haryana legislation to have a separate gurdwara panel flows from the Punjab Re-organisation Act 1966 under which the SGPC turned inter-state body corporate as Haryana and Himachal Pradesh were created by carving out territory from Punjab. Also included was the union territory of Chandigarh.

Here is Section 72 of the Punjab Re-organisation Act, 1966:

“72. General provisions as to statutory corporations.

 (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided by the foregoing provisions of this Part, where any body corporate constituted under a Central Act, State Act or Provincial Act for the existing State of Punjab or any part thereof serves the needs of the successor States or has, by virtue of the provisions of Part II, become an inter-State body corporate, then, the body corporate shall, on and from the appointed day, continue to function and operate in those areas in respect of which it was functioning and operating immediately before that day, subject to such directions as may from time to time be issued by the Central Government, until other provisions is made by law in respect of the said body corporate.

(2) Any direction issued by the Central Government under sub-section (1) in respect of any such body corporate may include a direction that any law by which the said body corporate is governed shall, in its application to that body corporate, have effect, subject to such exceptions and modifications as may be specified in the direction.

(3) For the removal of doubt it is hereby declared that the provisions of this section shall apply also to the Punjab University constituted under the Punjab University Act, 1947 (East Punjab Act 7 of 1947), the Punjab Agricultural University Act, 1961 (Punjab Act 32 of 1961), and the Board constituted under the provisions of Part III of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (Punjab Act 8 of 1925).”

This is the legal aspect.

Equally important is the political dimension.

Autonomy to the states has been on the  agenda of the Shiromani Akali Dal that was first articulated in the Batala resolution of 1968 and reinforced under the Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1973. The party struggled for the state autonomy over the years.

The basic issue is why the Akali Dal should deny this autonomy to the Sikhs in the neighbouring states to manage their own gurdwaras. Delhi and several other states have their own bodies for the management of gurdwaras.

The issue for separate Haryana panel had been raised earlier too. Then SGPC chief Gurcharan Singh Tohra at one stage consulted Justice Kuldip Singh (retd) and Prof Kashmira Singh when the demand had gained momentum. Both the legal luminaries had quoted provisions from the Punjab Re-organisation Act. Tohra succeeded in mollifying the Haryana leaders at that time.

Sources maintain that the provocation for the renewed demand was the propping of certain unelected leaders in the SGPC by Akali Dal president Sukhbir Singh Badal. He got co-opted a Haryana Akali leader close to him in the SGPC and elevated him as the senior vice-president. He functioned as representative of the Akali Dal chief in the SGPC. The SGPC has eleven elected members from Haryana. They felt slighted. This is one aspect.

The population of Sikhs in Haryana is next to Punjab. The Sikh population in Delhi is proportionately less than in Haryana. However, the Sikhs in Delhi have their own gurdwara body under the 1971 Act. This setting up of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee turned into a platform for the Sikhs in the Capital to articulate their issues and have a political say.

That is not the case in Haryana where the Sikhs do not carry much weight in the political set up. The separate gurdwara committee would add political weight to the Sikhs in that state.

The Akali Dal can’t justify denying autonomy to the Sikhs in Haryana.

Such demands would not have cropped up in case the Akali Dal had pursued with its earlier demand for all India Sikh gurdwara legislation. Two drafts of this legislation were prepared, the last one being in 2000. The party subsequently distanced from this demand as this would have loosened the grip of the Badal family over the SGPC. The demand was never taken up by the party despite being part of the government at the centre. The draft was sent to the Punjab government by the Home ministry. Nothing is known as to what happened after that.