The Supreme Court on Wednesday, November 4, stayed the Madras High Court’s order directing the formation of a five-member Board of Management to take over the administration of the Chidambaram Nataraja Temple from the Podhu Dikshitars, as reported in LiveLaw.
A Bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul Pancholi passed the interim order while hearing a challenge filed by the temple’s Podhu Dikshitars, who argued that the High Court’s directive interfered with their constitutional right to administer the temple under Article 26.
On 30 October 2026, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justices G Jayachandran and E Manoharan, ordered the constitution of the Board while disposing of a batch of writ petitions concerning the administration of the Sri Sabanayagar Temple, popularly known as the Chidambaram Nataraja Temple.
The High Court had held that judicial intervention was necessary to address allegations of maladministration and directed the Board to take charge of the temple’s administration “till the ill is cured”.
The proposed five-member Board was to be headed by retired Madras High Court judge Justice V Bharathidasan as Chairman, with retired judge Justice R Suresh Kumar as Co-Chairman and former IAS officer C Rajendran as a member. The Secretaries of the Podhu Dikshitars and the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department were to serve as ex-officio members.
The Board was entrusted with overseeing the temple’s properties, finances, heritage conservation and other administrative matters. Its responsibilities included retrieving encroached temple properties, recovering pending rental arrears, maintaining proper accounts and ensuring equal opportunities for devotees to have darshan from the Kanagasabai.
However, the High Court had clarified that the conduct of daily rituals and periodical festivals would remain the exclusive prerogative of the Podhu Dikshitars, subject to established customs and practices.
The Podhu Dikshitars subsequently challenged the High Court’s order before the Supreme Court, contending that handing over the temple’s administration to an external Board violated their right to manage religious affairs under Article 26 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has now stayed the High Court’s direction pending further proceedings.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
