HR&CE Department Can Probe Into Temple Maladministration Involving Public Donations, Can't Interfere In Religious Practice: Madras High Court

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice P Dhanabal observed as under,

“When public contributions/donations have been accepted, temple assumes the character of a public institution. If public contributions are involved, State can intervene in case of maladministration or misappropriation of funds, following the procedure as outlined in the Act and Rules, and take necessary actions. Right to administer the temple would not include maladministration. Therefore, power of State is not confined only in respect of notified public religious institutions, since the definition of temple would include temple used as a place of public religious worship and dedicated to, and Joint Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner is empowered to decide issues relating to characteristic of a religious institution,” the court said.

The bench, however, added that while the department could initiate all appropriate actions in the event of maladministration, it could not interfere with the religious practices or performance of poojas in the temple.

“Therefore, in the event of maladministration, illegality or irregularity in dealing with the properties of the temple, the HR & CE department is bound to step in and initiate all appropriate actions. However, department has no power to interfere with the religious practices or performance of poojas in the temple, which is to be done as per the custom and practice prevailing amongst the villagers and adopted in the temple,” the court said.

The court was hearing a writ appeal in connection with a plea regarding maladministration in the day to day administration of Arul Migu Vembiamman Thirukovil. The hereditary trustee of the temple had originally filed the writ petition seeking direction to the District Collector to consider his representation and restrain the respondents (appellants in the present case) from interfering with the administration of the temple.

While disposing of the above petition, the writ court had directed the appellants not to interfere with the administration of the temple. The court had also directed the HR & CE Department to examine the issue at appropriate levels and take a decision after hearing the parties.

The appellant questioned the maintainability of the writ petition. He also argued that the writ prayer was only to consider the representation and to restrain him, but the writ court had gone beyond the scope of the petition and issued directions to the department.

Regarding maintainability, the court noted that the temple was located in Grama natham land and the land belonged to the villagers. The court also noted that the whole villagers were worshipping the deity in temple and contributing to the conduct of poojas, festivals, functions, etc. Thus, the court noted that the temple assumed the character of a public institution and the state could interfere in its administration.

With respect to the argument that the writ court travelled beyond scope, the court observed that the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution does not confine itself to the relief sought for and the courts had power to mould the prayer or expand the scope of the plea.

Thus, finding no reason to intervene with the order of the single judge, the court disposed the appeal.

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. A. M. Venkata Krishnan

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. U. Venkatesan, Mr. S. Senthilmurugan Special Government Pleader, Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader [HR & CE]

Case Title: R Thirumurugan v. R Thennarasu and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 473

Case No: WA No. 2077 of 2023

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment