Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 19381
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
Prasannakumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Collector Office, Ramanathapuram District. – Respondent
W.P(MD)No. 5826 of 2026|W.M.P(MD) Nos.4858 & 4860 of 2026
For Petitioner: Mr. R. Jegadeeswaran
For R1: Mr. J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader
For R2:Mr.Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General Asst. by Mr. J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader
For R3: Mr.S.Ramesh
Photography in designated temple areas is permissible without affecting sanctity.
Headnote:The case deals with the Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the proceedings of a public tender notice for engaging photographers inside a temple. The court found that taking photographs in designated areas would not affect temple sanctity and quashed the impugned order. The main issue is whether allowing photography affects the sanctity of religious practices. The court concluded that photography in earmarked spots is permissible, preserving sanctity and honoring devotees' wishes.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to temple photography (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. government's response on photography (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's validation of photography in specific zones (Para 6) |
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
The present writ petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in ve.Aa.No.14/2026/Sema ThoA/Ramanathapuram, dated 27.02.2026 on the file of the third respondent.
2. According to the petitioner, he is the devotee of the Arul Migu Sri Ramanathaswamy Thirukovil and the third respondent has issued a public tender notice in the daily newspaper including the proceedings for engaging cameras. The same has been challenged mainly on the ground that the respondents failed to consider that the devotees are taking bath in the holy water in the well situated inside the temple. Despite the ban of cellphone usage, now the cameras have been permitted. According to him, if the cameras are allowed, that will spoil the sanctity of the temple.
Hence, he challenged the impugned order.
3. The learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, submits that since the cellphone usage has been totally banned, the devotees from all over the countries wish to take photographs inside the temple for their memory of visiting the temple. Hence, the Government has decided to engage cameramen for taking photographs for the devotees in three places inside the temple, where there are no religious activities carried out, viz., (1) the southern side of the third praharam, (2) the thirukalyana mandabam situated in front of the Ambal Sannath and (3) the eastern side of the Rajagopuram.
4. It is further contended that the photographs will be taken by the persons engaged by the temple only in these three places, where there are no religious activities carried out and hence, the same will not affect the sanctity of the temple. Only in order to avoid any contrary usage of cellphones inside the temple, the three places have been earmarked for taking photographs.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records.
6. We are of the view that taking photographs in the above earmarked places will not affect the sanctity of the temple. However, we make it clear that the photographs should be taken only in the places identified and earmarked by the temple and the cameramen should not be allowed inside the temple and only if the devotees voluntarily come to take photographs, the cameramen may provide service for the devotees.
7. With the said observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
