2025 Supreme(Mad) 2465
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
T.S. Sankar - Petitioner
Versus
The Chief Additional Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai and Ors. – Respondents
W.P.Nos. 32503 of 2024 & 11487 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos. 35321 of 2024 & 12972 of 2025
Decided On : 30-04-2025
For the Petitioners: Mr. T.S. Sankar (Party in person)
For the Respondents: Mr. N.R.R. Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader (HR & CE), Mr. V. Srikanth.
Trusteeship disqualification arises under Section 26(1-A) for any individual with a subsisting lease on property of a religious endowment, ensuring integrity of temple management.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 - Section 26(1-A) - Writ petitions concerning the trusteeship of Arulmighu Arunachaleswarar Temple - Disqualification of trustee for holding a subsisting lease - Fifth respondent, being a lessee, is disqualified from being a trustee, having made unauthorized alterations to temple property - Petitioner seeks removal of fifth respondent as chairman based on disqualification. (Paras 1, 4, 31, 48)
(B) Locus Standi - The petitioner as a devotee of the temple has the standing to challenge the fifth respondent's appointment - The court affirms that locus standi is not limited by personal grievances. (Paras 31)
(C) Disqualification - Disqualification is affirmed under Section 26(1-A) due to holding a lease on temple property, alongside findings of unauthorized property alterations. (Paras 47-48)
(D) Court's order - The fifth respondent disqualified as trustee and ordered to cease administration of temple immediately; temple property to be protected for temple's original purpose. (Paras 49, 51) (E) Cost - Respondents to pay Rs.25,000/- to the legal services authority. (Paras 49)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. importance of the arulmigu arunachaleswarar temple. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. detailing the writ petition about disqualification for trusteeship. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments against the fifth respondent's qualifications. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. findings on the trustee's occupancy and lease issues. (Para 11) |
| 5. judicial guidelines for temple endowment management. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. legality of the petitioner’s complaints and the writ petition. (Para 28 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. final directives regarding temple property and rightful management. (Para 49 , 52 , 72) |
| 8. outcome of the writ petition and directives for future action. (Para 51) |
ORDER :
(D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.)

Arulmigu Arunachaleswarar Temple is one of the most important Hindu temples in our nation and is among the largest temples in India. Lord Siva is worshipped as Arunachaleswarar or Annamalaiyar. The temple is a ‘paadal petra sthalam’. The deity’s praise is sung repeatedly in the Tamil Bhakthi Literature, ‘Thevaram’, which was written in or about the the 7th century. It is also stated that in the 9th century, Saiva Saint Poet Manikavasagar composed the entire Thiruvempavai in the said temple. The Karthigai Deepam festival, celebrated on the full moon day, is also special to the temple. The Arunachala Hill, at the base of which the temple is located and the entire township itself is considered sacred, and millions of people visit the temple and undertake Girivalam. We are concerned with the matters regarding the said temple and certain specific endowments associated with it in these Writ Petitions.
2. These two writ petitions relate to the Arulmighu Arunachaleswarar Temple in Thiruvannamalai. As the arguments overlap and pertain to different aspects of the same temple, the matters are disposed of through this common order.
A) W.P. No. 32503 of 2024:
3. W.P.No.32503 of 2024 is filed with a prayer to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.102081/2023/A1 dated 05.04.2024, passed by the second respondent, the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Board, Chennai, and to quash the same. And consequently to terminate the fifth respondent, namely Jeevanantham, from the post of Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Arulmighu Arunachaleswarar Temple, Thiruvannamalai.
4. The fifth respondent, was appointed as a Trustee and thereafter, elected as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Temple. As per Section 26(1-A) if a person has a subsisting lease with the temple or the religious endowment he is disqualified to be a trustee. The below mentioned picture is the property of the Kalasanti Kattalai, an endowment attached to the temple.

5. The petitioner being a lessee has put up a structure and is residing in the first floor and commercially occupying one shop in the ground floor even today. As such, he is disqualified to be a trustee without any iota of doubt whatsoever. However, with all his might, the fifth respondent and the official respondents, have tried to defend the indefensible, making all kinds of arguments and hence the following detailed judgment.
6. The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that on 01.07.2023, the second respondent undertook the exercise of appointing five board members of trustees to the temple. The petitioner claims that all of them have a political background. The fifth respondent is the State Executive Member of the ruling political party, and one of his family members served as the Municipal Chairman. Furthermore, the petitioner contends that the fifth respondent entered into a rental agreement dated 13.12.2010, registered as Document No.12381 of 2010 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Thiruvannamalai, concerning one of the trusts associated with the Arunachaleswarar Temple, namely Kalasanthi Arakattalai, measuring an area of 1,995 square feet. In fact, the fifth respondent demolished the building of the said Arakattalai and constructed a two-storied RCC concrete str









