Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.SWAMINATHAN
G. Pandi – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Madurai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical context of temple disputes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claims on temple closure and management. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. rituals as rights; temple as a juristic person. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. constitutional rights to religious practice. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. court orders reopening and preservation of worship rights. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
G.R. SWAMINATHAN, J.
"An orthodox Brahmin once brought with him his puja casket with a view to give it to His Holiness and receive it back with his blessings. His Holiness took it and opened it, and scanned the several images therein. Then he picked up a saligrama stone (Where it is believed some aspect of Maha Vishnu is immanent) and exclaimed, 'Why, the Lord here has been starved for seven years.'
The disciple was taken aback at this accusation and said, 'So far as I remember, I have not been remiss in my worship to justify such a charge. If I have unconsciously erred, I am certainly prepared to abide by your Holiness's directions.
His Holiness replied, 'I am sorry but you have not performed the worship properly. The deity immanent here required daily Kshirabhisheka (bathing in milk) and Payasanaivedya (offering of milk food) and I note that these
Closure of a temple without just cause violates the fundamental right to religious practice under Article 25 of the Constitution, emphasizing protection of rituals and religious freedom.
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.
The fundamental right to worship under Article 25 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to open the temple for worship and allows all devotees to participate in the festival without discr....
The appointment of a fit person for temple administration can be a solution to resolve clashes and restore peace in cases of repeated disturbances during temple functions and festivals.
The fundamental rights to assemble peaceably and practice religion, as well as the significance of centuries-old customs and religious practices, were central to the judgment.
Court does not adjudicate on disputes relating to temple customs under Article 226; appropriate remedy lies with the Civil Court.
Caste-based restrictions in the appointment of priests violate constitutional rights to equality and must align with qualifications, not caste.
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
