A bench of justices Altamas Kabir and S S Nijjar asked Attorney General G E Vahanvati to assist the court in the matter and posted it for further hearing on Friday.

The apex court's direction came on a public interest litigation (PIL) by advocate Vineet Dhanda challenging the validity of Section 3 of the Bodh Gaya Temple Act, 1949, under which the government appoints a 9-member panel with a Hindu as its chairman and the majority of its members being Hindus rather than Buddhists.

Dhanda submitted the constitution of the committee of the Maha Bodhi Temple, which is the holiest place of Buddhists, violated Articles 26 and 25 of the Constitution.

While Article 25 of the Constitution gives liberty or freedom to profess, practise, propagate any religion, the Article 26 gives fundamental right to an individual and community to manage their religious affairs and matters on their own and administer their own religious places or institutions, he said.

The advocate pointed out that the Bodh Gaya Temple Act, 1949, however, mandates that the committee regulating the affairs of Maha Bodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya would have Hindus in majority as the law mandates its panel chairman and four members to be Hindus, leaving only four remaining seats for Buddhists members.