Back
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, P. G. AJITHKUMAR
Vishnunarayanan – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Department of Revenue & Devaswom, Government Secretariat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility criteria for melsanthies. (Para 1) |
| 2. legal framework regarding administrative control. (Para 2 , 10) |
| 3. arguments focusing on constitutional rights and regulations for temple appointments. (Para 12 , 18) |
| 4. implications of court rulings on appointments. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 5. principles established regarding religious practices. (Para 25 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. overarching conclusions on religious freedoms. (Para 31 , 32) |
| 7. court's emphasis on constitutional principles against caste-based appointment practices. (Para 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
| INDEX | ||
| Sl. No. | Description | Pages |
| 1. | Background and pleadings | 12-31 |
| 2. | Provisions under the TRAVANCORE-COCHIN HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS ACT , 1950 | 32-38 |
| 3. | Whether State of Kerala through Revenue (Devaswom) Department have administrative control over Sabarimala Devaswom and Malikappuram Devaswom and whether Travancore Devaswom Board is fully controlled by the State | 39-42 |
| 4. | The guidelines and terms of settlement in the matter of appointment of Melsanthies in Sabarimala Devaswom and Malikappuram Devaswom. | 42-67 |
| 5. | Applicability of the provisions under the Ke | |
Exclusion of other castes from the position of Melsanthi based on heritage does not violate constitutional rights, as it respects longstanding religious practices and customs integral to the temple's....
Caste-based restrictions in the appointment of priests violate constitutional rights to equality and must align with qualifications, not caste.
The appointment of Archakas in temples constructed as per Agamas shall be governed by the Agamas and not by the Rules framed by the State Government.
The entry of non-Hindus into Hindu temples can be permitted if sanctioned by temple authorities, emphasizing the role of customs and the authority of the Thanthri while upholding the statutory provis....
Caste cannot claim ownership of a temple as it is deemed public unless declared private; only distinct religious groups qualify as denominations under constitutional protections.
The court established that disputes regarding hereditary claims and functions related to temple duties should be resolved in civil court rather than through writ jurisdiction, emphasizing the secular....
The appointment of an Archaka is a secular act and hence, the hereditary right cannot be claimed.
The court affirmed that access to public temples cannot be restricted based on caste or community, emphasizing the fundamental right to worship under Article 25 of the Constitution.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
