Madras High Court Upholds 'Hindus Only' Clause for Staff in Temple-Run College

Chennai: The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging an employment notification issued by a college run by Arulmigu Kapaleeswarar Temple that restricted eligibility for various posts, including Office Assistant, to only persons professing the Hindu religion. The court held that the college, being a self-financing institution run by the temple without state aid, falls under the purview of Article 16(5) of the Constitution, which permits religious requirements for positions in connection with the affairs of a religious institution.

The judgment was delivered by Justice Vivek Kumar Singh .

Background of the Case

The petitioner, identifying as a Tamil Muslim, challenged an advertisement published on October 13, 2021, by the Arulmigu Kapaleeswarar Arts and Science College, Kolathur. The notification invited applications and called for walk-in interviews for several non-teaching posts, including Office Assistant, Watchman, Cleaner, and Sweeper . A key condition in the advertisement was that only "Hindus" were eligible to apply for these positions.

Aggrieved by this exclusion based on his religion, the petitioner filed a writ petition arguing that the condition violated the fundamental right to equality of opportunity in public employment guaranteed under Article 16(1) and 16(2) of the Constitution, which prohibit discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, or residence.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner's Contentions:

The petitioner's counsel argued that the college is primarily an educational institution, not a "religious institution" as defined under Section 6(18) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (HR & CE Act). Therefore, the exception provided in Article 16(5) of the Constitution, which allows religious qualifications for posts in connection with the affairs of a religious or denominational institution or its governing body, would not apply to the college staff.

It was further contended that Section 10 of the HR & CE Act, which requires the Commissioner and other officers of the HR & CE Department to be Hindus, does not extend to the teaching or non-teaching staff of educational institutions administered by temples, as their duties are secular and not religious in nature. Running an educational institution, the petitioner argued, is a secular activity.

Respondent's Contentions:

Conversely, the counsel for the respondents, including the college and the temple, submitted that the college was established and is fully funded by the Arulmigu Kapaleeswarar Temple . They argued that the college's functioning is intrinsically linked to the affairs of the temple and is governed by the HR & CE Act.

It was contended that as per the provisions of the HR & CE Act, including Section 10, persons appointed to positions within the institutions managed by the temple must be Hindus. They argued that the college, operating without state financial aid as a self-financing institution, does not fall under the direct purview of Article 16(1) and 16(2) in the same manner as a state-funded public body, and that Article 16(5) correctly applies to permit religious restrictions in such institutions.

Court's Analysis and Decision

The High Court considered the arguments and the material available on record. The court observed that the third respondent college is a self-financing institution run by the temple without receiving state aid, with expenses covered by student fees.

The court's reasoning centered on the applicability of Article 16(5) of the Constitution. The judgment states:

"On perusal of the records, it is seen that the third respondent/college is a self financing institution run by the temple without acquiring any aid from the State and met out the expenses through students fees. The third respondent does not come under the provisions of Article 16(1) and 16(2), whereas it comes under the purview of the provision of Article 16(5) of the Constitution of India."

The court further held that:

"It is pertinent to note that only Hindus are eligible for appointment in the third respondent college as it was started by the temple and it is a religious institution governed by the provisions of the HR & CE Act. As per Section 10 of the HR & CE Act, any appointment to the college, shall be a person professing the Hindu Religion and shall cease to hold office as such when he ceases to profess that religion."

Based on this interpretation, the court concluded that the condition requiring employees to be Hindu was permissible under Article 16(5) and the provisions of the HR & CE Act, finding that the college is considered a religious institution governed by the Act for the purpose of appointments.

Accordingly, the High Court found the writ petition to be without merit and dismissed it.

The decision highlights a complex interplay between constitutional guarantees of equal opportunity in employment and the special provisions relating to religious and denominational institutions, particularly concerning institutions like educational colleges administered by religious bodies under specific state legislation like the HR & CE Act.