A.V.B.Prabhu vs Secretary to Government

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Mad) 941

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ANITA SUMANTH, C.KUMARAPPAN
A.V.B.Prabhu – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.M.R.Venkatesan for Mr.RM.Arun Swaminathan
For the Respondent:Mr.P.S.Raman. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader, Mr.A.K.Sriram Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Manohar

Table of Content
1. the state's unilateral undertaking of 'iconic project' constructions in temples without board of trustees' initiation and proper statutory budgeting constitutes a usurpation of management powers. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 57 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 64)
2. temple funds must be utilized following strict statutory priority (sections 35, 36, 86 of the hr & ce act) and require budgetary disclosure and trustee approval. (Para 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 70 , 71 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97)
3. the appointment of an executive officer must be temporary and transitional; the administration of a temple should revert to the board of trustees to maintain constitutional and statutory requirements. (Para 99 , 100 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114)
4. development works in temples must align with historical, archaeological, and architectural preservation, requiring mandatory statutory permits and adherence to temple traditions. (Para 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123)