Back
Declines to Direct Equal Recitation of Tamil Hymns at Meenakshi Temple Consecration
In a significant ruling on the limits of in religious rituals, the has declined to direct that Tamil hymns be given equal footing with Sanskrit during the upcoming Kumbabhishekam (consecration ceremony) at the historic . Justice C. Saravanan, presiding as a single judge, dismissed two writ petitions on , holding that a cannot substitute legislative or executive policy on matters of temple worship without an .
The court underscored that the issue of introducing non-Sanskrit recitations during core rituals remains before the , and that the legislature or executive is the to determine whether new practices should be formally adopted.
Two Petitions, Common Prayer
The first petition, filed by Tamil Rajendiran, sought a direction to implement recommendations from an expert committee to permit Tamil spiritual mantras and hymns alongside Sanskrit in the Yaga Saalai, Karuvarai, and Gopura Vimanam during all temple consecrations. The second petition, by D. Sureshbabu—who claims to be a trained 'Tamil Velvi Asiriyar'—challenged the temple administration's rejection of his request to perform sacred fire rituals (Velvi Kundam Nigalvugal) in Tamil during the Meenakshi temple's Kudamuzhukku scheduled for .
Both petitioners argued that Tamil, the language of the temple's ancient builders and saints, deserved equal prominence with Sanskrit. They pointed to earlier court orders encouraging the use of Tamil hymns and the existence of expert committees formed to study the matter.
Respondents: Must Prevail
The state and the temple administration, represented by the and others, countered that the Meenakshi temple's rituals are governed by strict that have been followed for centuries. They argued that the Kumbabhishekam could only be performed by the hereditary Sthanika Battars and that any departure from established usage would amount to a violation of protected under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. They also emphasized that Tamil Othuvars are already permitted to recite hymns at a designated location, and that the petitioners were attempting to create new rights outside the legal framework.
Court: Writ Cannot Fill a
Justice Saravanan meticulously examined the constitutional scheme, noting that while Articles 25 and 26 guarantee , Article 16(5) creates exceptions for appointments in religious institutions. The court relied on the 's decision in Seshammal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1972), which held that temples constructed according to must adhere to those rites, and that prescribing standardized rituals would lead to "."
However, the court clarified that the question of whether the Meenakshi temple was constructed as per a specific Agama is still pending before a special committee chaired by former Judge Justice M. Chockalingam, constituted by the in . Moreover, a separate expert committee was formed in to advise on the use of Tamil and other languages during consecrations. Both committees have yet to submit final reports, and the is also seized of related appeals.
"Unless Rules are framed, a person who is not an employee of any of the temples cannot independently seek a prayer for recitation of hymns during the Velvi Kundam Nigalvugam,"
the court observed. It added that the petitioners, like any devotee, are free to participate in the ceremony but cannot demand a specific role in the rituals.
" Intended to Implement Law, Not Make Law"
A central theme of the judgment was the limits of
under Article 226.
"It is for the Legislature or the Executive to take a call as to whether the time has come to allow others to participate in events such as Kudamuzhukku (Kumbabhishegam), keeping in view the progress made since the Constitution was adopted on
,"
the court stated.
The judge noted that while Tamil hymns are already being recited by Othuvars in the temple precincts, directing that they be given equal status alongside Sanskrit inside the sanctum sanctorum, Yaga Salai, or atop the Vimana would require a specific legislative or . In its absence, a cannot substitute its own opinion for that of the competent authorities.
Key Observations
-
"That apart, unless Rules are framed, a person who is not an employee of any of the temples cannot independently seek a prayer for recitation of hymns during the Velvi Kundam Nigalvugam… However, like all devotees, the petitioner can participate in the Kudamuzhukku scheduled to be held on 17.09.2026."
-
"It is for the Legislature or the Executive to take a call as to whether the time has come to allow others to participate in events such as Kudamuzhukku (Kumbabhishegam)..."
-
"The recitation of Tamil hymns including the Tamil spiritual mantras by the Othuvars has already been implemented and is in practice."
-
"It emerges that as on date, the law is that in the case of temples which have been constructed in accordance with the , the rituals in such temples have to be strictly followed in accordance with the ."
Decision and Implications
The court dismissed both writ petitions with the above observations, making no order as to costs. The ruling effectively leaves the undisturbed for the upcoming consecration on September 17. The Meenakshi temple will proceed with its longstanding practice of Sanskrit-led rituals, with Tamil hymns by Othuvars at designated areas.
For the broader debate on language equality in temple worship, the ball remains firmly in the court of the legislature and the executive, as well as the . Until a clear legal framework emerges—or the expert committees submit their findings—the High Court has signaled that it will not break the doctrinal mould through .
