Special Honours At Temple Cannot Be Claimed As Absolute Right, First Honour Always To Deity: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently held that special honours in a temple cannot be claimed as an absolute right and that the first honour in the temple was always to the deity. The court thus dismissed the plea of an ashramam that sought first special honour for its head at the Sri Devaraja Swamy Temple in Kanchipuram. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted though there was an existing practice of honouring the heads, whether it could be claimed as a right or not was an issue that was to be determined by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department. “This Court is of the considered view that these kind of special honors can never be demanded, as it cannot be construed as an absolute right. The 1st honour is always to the deities in the Temple and honouring Heads of Mutts, though being followed as a practice, is an issue to be decided by the competent authority under the Act. It is not disputed by the HR&CE Department that the said honour has been conferred on the Head of appellant Mutt on five occasions after the year 1991. However, it is to be claimed as a right or not, to be determined by the competent authority under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Act, 1959, more specifically under Section 63(e) of the said Act,” the court said. The court was hearing an appeal filed by Srirangam Srimath Andavan Ashramam. The original writ petition was filed by Thathadesikar Thiruvamsathar Sabha seeking to forbear the HR & CE authorities from interfering with the religious usage/customs of the temple. In the writ petition, the single judge held that honour could be extended only to 5 mutts as per practice. Ie. (i) Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam - Sankara Mutt, Kanchipuram, (ii) Sri Ahobila Mutt, (iii) Sri Vanamalai Mutt, Nangunery, (iv) Sri Parakala Jeeyar Mutt, Mysore and (v) Sri Vyasarayar Mutt, Sosale (Udupi), and if honour was extended to anyone else, it would be open to challenge the same. The present appeal was filed by a third party challenging the order, arguing that the practice of honouring the appellant mutt head had been dispensed with. It was argued that the appellant had not been made a party to the writ petition a could not defend their case. The HR & CE, on the other hand, submitted that as per the customs and usage, honours were being conferred on only 5 mutts. Taking note of the submissions, the court observed that special honours could not be sought for as a matter of right, and a decision regarding the same had to be taken by the HR & CE Department. Thus, the court gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority under Section 63(e) of the Act. Finding no infirmity with the order, the court was not inclined to entertain the appeal and dismissed the same. Counsel for Appellant: Mr. M. S. Krishnan, Senior Counsel For Mr.Arun C.Mohan Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan For M/s. G. R.Associates, Mr.NRR.Arun Natarajan Spl. Govt. Pleader (HR&CE), Mr.R.Bharanidharan Case Title: Srirangam Srimath Andavan Ashramam v. Thathadesikar Thiruvamsathar Sabha & Ors Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 501 Case No: W.A.No.1280 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

Special Honours At Temple Cannot Be Claimed As Absolute Right, First Honour Always To Deity: Madras High Court

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

Special Honours At Temple Cannot Be Claimed As Absolute Right, First Honour Always To Deity: Madras High Court

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers