The Madras High Court on Friday, recorded the Tamil Nadu government decision to withdraw its order allowing the use of temple funds of Pollachi Masani Amman – for a luxury resort project in Ooty. The court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by petitioner P. Baskar against the Principal Secretary of the Tourism Department and other officials of the HR&CE department, challenging the legality of the government’s order.
The PIL sought a writ of certiorari to quash Government Order (G.O.) Ms. 535, dated 24 December 2024, which permitted breaking a fixed deposit of ₹15 crore from the surplus funds of Masani Amman Temple in Pollachi, under the control of the Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department. The funds were earmarked for the construction of a luxury resort in Ooty’s Kandal area, near the Subramanian Swamy Temple.
B. Jagannath, appeared for petitioner & AK Sriram, Senior Advocate, assisted by R.Bharanidharan, appeared for the HR&CE temple officials.
Senior Advocate J. Ravindran, representing the government, assisted by Government Pleader Edwin Prabakar, stated that the use of the term “resort” in the government order was a mistake and that the proposed project was intended to be a “Yatri Niwas” (pilgrim accommodation). However, the petitioner’s counsel, B. Jagannath, strongly opposed this claim, arguing that the government order explicitly mentioned the term “resort” in the tabulated estimates and that the project violated multiple provisions of the HR & CE Act, including Sections 36, 36A, and 66(1).
Further strengthening the petitioner’s argument, a news report from Dinamalar dated 8 March 2025, was presented, highlighting that devotees had raised objections against the proposed construction. Several petitions were sent to the CM Cell and the HR&CE Minister but it was in vain as there was no response.
The petitioner also cited a prior judgment of the Madras High Court in W.P. No. 19084 of 2024, delivered on 9 January 2025, which restricted the diversion of temple funds for non-religious purposes.
Taking cognizance of the arguments, the Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, observed that either an interim stay would be issued, or the impugned order should be withdrawn. The Additional Advocate General, in response, submitted that the government had decided to withdraw the order. The court recorded this statement and closed the petition without issuing a stay order, noting that the issue had been resolved through the government’s undertaking.
The judgment has been welcomed by devotees and temple activists, who argue that temple funds should be utilized strictly for religious and welfare purposes as per legal provisions.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
