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.

ORDER :

D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

The Writ Petition is filed for a certiorari calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide No.Na.Ka.68/2025/A5 dated 21.01.2025 and quash the same.

2. The petitioner is claiming that the temple belongs to three communities. The term 'community' is a sweet coated word used for caste. This Court has already held that the entity called caste cannot be recognised by this Court as the same is against the Constitutional Board and it has also been held to be opposed to be public policy. Perpetuation of caste cannot be permitted. Useful reference in this regard can be made to the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.3838 of 2025.

3. In this case, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the temple is a private temple. The temple being worshiped by general public is deemed to be a public temple. The claim that it is a private temple has to be established in the manner known to law. The petitioner has to approach under Section 63 of the Tamilnadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 or by filing a civil suit.

4. In this case, the application is only pending as on date and there is no declaration as yet. Therefore no exception whatsoever can be made to the order passed by the authority. Caste cannot claim any ownership of the temple. So long as the temple is not declared as a private temple then the law is that the temple would be deemed to be only a public temple. Therefore, if the temple is not declared as a private temple as on date, then no exception whatsoever can be passed by the order of the authority in this regard. Once the temple is a public temple, caste entities cannot claim any right. 4. The temple is a public temple and, as such, can be worshipped, managed, and administered by all devotees. Even a social group identifying itself by the name of the caste may have a particular way of worship and will be entitled to their customary rights regarding that manner of worship. Caste, in itself, is not a ‘religious denomination.’ Believers in caste discrimination try to disguise their hatred and inequality under the guise of ‘religious denomination,’ viewing temples as fertile ground for nurturing these divisive instincts and creating social unrest. Many public temples are being labeled as belonging to a particular ‘caste.’ Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India protect only essential religious practices and the rights of religious denominations. No caste can claim ownership of a temple. The administration of the temple based on caste identity is not a religious practice. This matter is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Sri Adi Visheshwara of Kashi Vishwanath Temple v. State of U.P. , (1997) 4 SCC 606 , examined the issues about religious denomination and religious practice in detail. It has laid down that ‘denomination’ pertains to ‘religion.’ ‘Caste’ is not ‘Religion’. It is essential to extract the following passages for ready reference:

“23. The question is whether Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple is a denominational Temple and whether the Act interferes with freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise and to propagate religion of one's choice and whether the devotees of Lord Vishwanath are members of religious denomination and shall have the fundamental right to manage its affairs in the matter of religion guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution or to administer the properties of the Temple in accordance with law. In the Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha Iyer (1987, Reprint Edn.) at p. 315, the author says that “denomination” means a class or collection of individuals called by the same name; a sect; a class of units; a distinctively named church or sect as clergy of all denominations. The maxim Denominatio est a digniore means “Denomination is from the more worthy” (Burrill). “Denominatio fieri debet a dignioribus”, another maxim means “denomination should be deduce