The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on Friday issued a strong warning against individuals making derogatory or caste-based remarks about members of the judiciary, stating that such conduct will not be tolerated. The Division Bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice KK Ramakrishnan made the observations while hearing appeals related to the Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam lamp-lighting dispute.

The bench said that although judges are restrained from responding publicly, this cannot be taken as an opportunity to provoke or undermine the judiciary. “We can tolerate to some extent. If it exceeds, we’ll take action. You know that they have exceeded. They can’t keep on provoking, making (remarks). Just because the courts and judges are not supposed to react, they can’t take advantage of it,” the court stated.

The remarks came after Advocate MR Venkatesh, representing the writ petitioners, informed the bench that personal and caste-based attacks were being made online against the single judge, Justice GR Swaminathan, who had ordered the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at 6 PM on 3 December 2025.

Reiterating that attempts to demoralise the judiciary would have consequences, the bench cautioned litigants and political actors against overstepping legal boundaries. “Persons violating law think there won’t be any reaction. Please instruct your clients not to test the patience of court and degrade the judiciary,” the judges said.

They further warned that institutional authority must be respected irrespective of who is in power: “Whether you’re in power or not, you have tongue or no tongue. Whatever it is, if you’re going to demoralise the institution, the constitution will remain only in paper.”

The bench adjourned the appeals to 12 December 2025, when all petitions challenging the single judge’s order directing the temple administration to light the Karthigai Deepam will be heard together.

(Source: LiveLaw)

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Don’t Test The Patience Of Court And Degrade The Judiciary”, Madras High Court Slams Casteist Attacks On Justice GR Swaminathan appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has severely criticized the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department and the district administration of Karur for their persistent failure to remove encroachments on more than 500 acres of land belonging to Arulmigu Balasubramaniaswamy Temple at Vennimalai.

The bench comprising Justices P Velmurugan and B Pugalendhi said that the continued inaction of officials despite repeated judicial directions amounted to contempt of court and reflected “lawlessness in the State.”

The case arose from a contempt petition filed by A. Radhakrishnan, a devotee who had earlier approached the court in 2018 seeking recovery of temple properties. Despite a 2019 order directing the HR&CE Department to take immediate steps to clear encroachments, the directive remained largely unimplemented even after six years.

With nearly 507.88 acres of temple land still under illegal occupation, Radhakrishnan initiated contempt proceedings against senior officials of the department.

In March 2024, the court took cognizance of the contempt, observing that the HR&CE Department despite being the statutory guardian of temple assets had failed to protect the property. The department’s own report admitted that its 2022 eviction drives failed due to protests by encroachers and a “lack of cooperation” from the police and other authorities.

To aid compliance, the court had earlier permitted the HR&CE Department to form a monitoring committee with revenue officials. However, subsequent hearings revealed “no meaningful progress.” On 3 October 2024, the bench suo motu impleaded several serving and retired HR&CE officers, asking them to explain their inaction.

During hearings, officers claimed they had faced “threats and intimidation” from encroachers and were unable to conduct evictions due to non-cooperation from the district administration and police.

The bench observed that such a state of affairs “shows the lawlessness in the State” and directed the Superintendent of Police, Karur, to provide full protection to the temple’s Executive Officer and the Joint Commissioner of HR&CE, Tiruppur.

“The court will not permit the hanging of Damocles’ sword over officers who are discharging their duties,” the bench warned, adding that any danger caused to officials during enforcement would make the Superintendent of Police personally liable.

A subsequent departmental report presented a startling revelation: 27 government officials, 49 industrialists and businessmen, and 38 other influential persons were among those who had encroached on temple lands. However, their names, positions, and details of occupation were not disclosed to the court.

The bench criticized the HR&CE Commissioner for not escalating the issue to the Revenue and Home Departments despite repeated warnings. It also noted that key documents required for reclaiming temple lands were readily available with the district administration and archives but had not been utilized.

“The HR&CE Department, the statutory guardian of temple properties, has failed to discharge its duties, leaving it to a devotee to pursue the matter before this Court,” the judges observed.

To ensure accountability, the bench suo motu impleaded the Superintendent of Police, Karur, as a party respondent and directed all respondents, including senior IAS officers, to personally appear before the court on 17 October 2025, with complete revenue records.

(Source: LawBeat)

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madras High Court Slams HR&CE For Failing To Clear Encroachments From Temple Lands In Karur appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has issued a significant order prohibiting the sacrifice of goats and chickens, as well as the cooking and serving of non-vegetarian food, on the Thiruparankundram Hill in Madurai district. The court also ruled that the hill should not be referred to as “Sikandar Hill.”

The order was passed by Justice R. Vijayakumar after a series of petitions were filed by representatives from both Hindu and Muslim communities seeking various directions concerning religious practices and property rights on the hill.

The Petitions

Madurai district president of the Hindu Makkal Katchi, Solai Kannan, filed a petition requesting a ban on the sacrifice of goats and chickens and the serving of non-vegetarian food at Thiruparankundram Hill. Similarly, Ramalingam, executive of the Akhil Bharat Hanuman Sena, filed a petition seeking to ban prayers in the Nellithope area of the hill, while Paramasivam, organization secretary of the Hindu Makkal Katchi, also sought a prohibition on animal sacrifice.

On the other side, Osir Khan, Senior Managing Trustee of the Sikandar Dargah, filed a petition seeking permission to carry out maintenance and renovation works in the Dargah area. Abdul Jabbar petitioned for the provision of basic amenities — including roads, lighting, drinking water, and toilets — for devotees visiting the Dargah. Additionally, Suvasthi Sri Letshumisena Bhattacharya Maha Swami sought a declaration that the hill be recognized as “Samanar Hill” (Jain Hill).

Differing Bench Orders

These petitions were initially heard by a division bench comprising Justices J. Nisha Banu and S. Srimathi. Justice Nisha Banu dismissed all six petitions, while Justice Srimathi issued a differing order, stating that:

• The hill should be referred to only as “Thiruparankundram Hill”, not as “Sikandar Hill” or “Jamanar Hill.”
• The right to conduct Kanduri ceremonies or sacrifice goats and chickens at the Dargah must be established before a civil court.
• Until such rights are determined, no prayers, ceremonies, or animal sacrifices should be conducted.

Due to the conflicting opinions, the case was referred to a third judge, Justice R. Vijayakumar, for a final decision.

Archaeological and Legal Findings

Justice Vijayakumar, in his detailed judgment, upheld Justice Srimathi’s findings and provided several legal and historical clarifications.

He noted that under the Protection of Ancient Monuments Act, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) had issued notifications on 29 July 1908 and 7 February 1923, declaring the Pancha Pandava caves on the western slope and the caves behind the Sikandar Mosque on the hilltop as protected monuments.

Both notifications referred to the area as “Thiruparankundram Hill,” with no historical evidence of it ever being called “Sikandar Hill.” Justice Vijayakumar further cited a Privy Council order stating that 33 cents out of 170 acres of the hill excluding the Dargah and grove belong to the temple.

In a notable analogy, the judge observed, “A person who owns a house in Madurai may name that house as he wishes, but cannot expect the entire city to adopt that name. Similarly, when the entire hill is temple property and only a small portion has been granted to Muslims, it is unacceptable to rename the entire hill after the Dargah.”

Ban on Animal Sacrifice

Justice Vijayakumar agreed with Justice Srimathi’s view that animal sacrifices cannot be permitted on Thiruparankundram Hill. He noted that while the Dargah administration claimed that goat and chicken sacrifices were an ancient custom, the temple administration had denied any such historical practice.

The judgment cited peace talks held on 31 December 2024 under the supervision of the Kottatchiyar, where the temple authorities objected to the Dargah’s request for animal sacrifice and agreed to approach the appropriate court. The temple management also confirmed that no sacrifices took place during the last Kanduri festival, and no meeting was held to approve such rituals.

Justice Vijayakumar held that the matter remains sub judice, and no decision can be taken until a civil court determines the legitimacy of the claimed custom.

Archaeological Restrictions

The ASI has classified 172.2 acres of Thiruparankundram Hill as a protected monument area. Under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959, animals cannot be brought into such protected areas for any purpose, including ritual sacrifice. The court ruled that cooking and consumption of non-vegetarian food are prohibited except in designated zones outside the protected boundaries.

The judgment also noted that the ASI had written twice to the district administration requesting demarcation of the protected area, but the administration failed to cooperate.

On Prayer Rights and Access

The court further clarified that, as per a civil court order, the stairs leading to the Nellithope area belong to the Murugan Temple and connect the Murugan Temple with the Kashi Vishwanathar Temple. During festival processions, the Murugan temple’s vel (spear) is carried through these stairs.

Therefore, the judge held that Muslims may offer prayers in the Nellithope area during Ramzan and Bakrid, provided it does not interfere with the traditional temple routes.

Summarising the findings, the court concluded that animal sacrifices of goats and chickens are banned on Thiruparankundram Hill, cooking and serving non-vegetarian food are prohibited in the protected area, the hill must be referred to as “Thiruparankundram Hill” only not as “Sikandar Hill” or “Samanar Hill” and any claim to perform religious rites or sacrifices must first be established before a civil court.

With two of the three judges (Justices Srimathi and Vijayakumar) concurring on these points, the High Court’s ruling effectively prohibits all forms of animal sacrifice and non-vegetarian offerings on Thiruparankundram Hill, affirming its status as a protected archaeological and temple property.

Setback For DMK

In August 2025, the DMK government of Tamil Nadu asserted in the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court that the practice of sacrificing animals has long been followed at Thiruparankundram hill in Madurai.

Additional Chief Government Advocates Veera Kathiravan and Ravindran emphasized that religious practices should not be discriminated against based on caste, religion, or dietary customs. They presented records indicating that the location has been known as Sikandar Hill and that the practice of sacrificing goats and chickens has been ongoing.

(With inputs from Hindu Tamil)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Bans Animal Sacrifice And Non-Vegetarian Offerings On Thiruparankundram Hill; Bars Use Of Name ‘Sikandar Hill’; DMK Govt Faces Setback appeared first on The Commune.

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court on 28 July 2025 referred proceedings to the Chief Justice for initiating criminal contempt action against Advocate S. Vanchinathan, who is accused of repeatedly making allegations of caste bias against sitting judge Justice GR Swaminathan.

The matter was heard by Justices GR Swaminathan and K Rajasekar. During the hearing, Justice Swaminathan issued a sharp rebuke to some retired judges who had written to the Division Bench requesting it not to initiate contempt action against Vanchinathan. The Court took exception to the insinuation that the contempt proceedings were a form of retaliation against Vanchinathan for a prior complaint he had submitted against Justice Swaminathan to the Chief Justice of India.

Justice Swaminathan, addressing Vanchinathan directly in court, said, “We are also conscious of the Rule and Procedure. We are not fools. Tell this to the retired Judges who are standing with you. The whole ecosystem has ganged up behind you. We are aware of that. We will not be intimidated. We will not be cowed down. Judicial independence is supreme.”

The letter in question was issued on Saturday by retired Justice K. Chandru, who claimed to have secured written confirmation from seven other retired judges of the High Court. However, retired Justice KK Sasidharan publicly dissociated himself from the letter, stating, “I make it clear that I was not consulted nor have I sent any such ‘written confirmation’ authorizing Mr. Justice K. Chandru to issue the said letter.”

Calling the retired judges’ intervention “unfortunate,” the Bench noted in its order, “It is most unfortunate that gratuitous advice was given by certain retired Judges of this Court.”
Justice Swaminathan further remarked in court that their actions “amount to contempt, since the Court is seized of the matter.”

The Court also played in open court an interview allegedly given by Vanchinathan, in which he made remarks insinuating caste bias on the part of Justice Swaminathan. “Let the whole Bar watch,” Justice Swaminathan said while screening the clip.

Vanchinathan, appearing in person, refused to respond to the Court’s questions regarding the contents of the video unless he received a written notice. “I will only respond to what is given to me in writing,” he said.

Justice Swaminathan replied, “Mr. Vanchinathan, I, hundred per cent, respect your right to brutally criticise my judgments, you are entitled to it. I will be the first person to stand with you. But when you are alleging caste bias, things take a different turn. That, I will not tolerate.” He added, “Last 3, 4 years, you have been slandering me. I have not taken any action against you.”

He also pointed to previous instances, stating that Vanchinathan had claimed in an interview that he was biased against Senior Advocate P. Wilson “because he was not a Brahmin.”

Despite repeated questioning, Vanchinathan refused to confirm or deny his prior remarks, maintaining that he would only respond to a formal charge in writing.

The Court reiterated that the current proceedings were unrelated to Vanchinathan’s earlier complaint to the Chief Justice of India. The Bench stated in its order:

“We fail to understand as to the basis on which such atrocious allegation has been made against the Court… We clarify once again that the proceedings on hand has nothing to do with the alleged complaint said to have been given by Vanchinathan.”

It added, “We did not want to straightaway refer the matter to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to consider taking action. We wanted to comply with the principles of natural justice. That is why one of the videos was played in the presence of the members of the Bar. But Vanchinathan was not willing to own up the contents of the video.”

Noting Vanchinathan’s continued refusal to clarify his position, the Court concluded, “We place on record that Vanchinathan is not giving an affirmative answer to the specific question posed by this Court… These are only tentative observations made by this Court. As requested by Vanchinathan himself, we direct the Registry to place the papers before the Hon’ble Chief Justice to consider taking appropriate action, if so deemed fit.”

The controversy dates back to 24 July 2025, when the Court asked Vanchinathan to appear and clarify whether he stood by his alleged imputation of caste bias against Justice Swaminathan. On Monday, the Bench held that the advocate’s conduct prima facie constituted criminal contempt of court.

(With inputs from Verdictum)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “We Will Not Be Intimidated”: Justice GR Swaminathan Slams ‘Ecosystem’ Backing Advocate Vanchinathan appeared first on The Commune.

 The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has partially relaxed several restrictions imposed by the city police on the ‘Muruga Bakthargal Maanadu’/Murugan Devotees Conference, a large-scale Hindu religious conference organized by the Hindu organization Hindu Munnani, scheduled for 22 June 2025.

Court Modifies Police Conditions

Justice B. Pugalendhi delivered the verdict on two writ petitions filed by Hindu Munnani challenging the 52 conditions set by Madurai police. The organization had objected to six key restrictions, including:

• Mandatory vehicle passes for attendees
• Ban on vehicle processions
• Submission of participant lists in advance
• Permission from HR & CE Department and Madurai Corporation
• Complete ban on drone usage

The court upheld the vehicle pass rule but directed police to process applications within 24 hours and provide valid reasons for rejections. However, it struck down the requirement for submitting participant lists, noting that vehicle pass details would suffice.

On drone usage, the judge permitted two drones for event coverage, provided they remain within the venue. The conditions demanding HR & CE and Corporation permissions were deemed “irrelevant” and set aside.

The Tamil Nadu government and intervenors, including Makkal Kalai Ilakkiya Kazhagam, had opposed the event, fearing communal tensions. They cited past incidents, including a February 2025 agitation in Thiruparankundram, where Hindu groups protested alleged attempts to rename the sacred hill as “Sikandar Hill.”

Justice Pugalendhi referenced the Supreme Court’s rulings on maintaining communal harmony and warned against “mixing religion with politics.” He advised organizers to ensure the event remains strictly devotional and does not provoke unrest.

The conference, to be held near Vandiyur Toll Plaza, will feature miniature replicas of Lord Murugan’s six abodes (Arupadaiveedu), devotional chants, and cultural programs. While Hindu Munnani claimed self-managed crowd control, the court directed police to monitor traffic near the highway venue.

Hindu Munnani had initially sought permission to install Murugan idols and conduct rituals from June 10-22, but police denied approval, citing potential disturbances near residential areas and schools. The court, however, allowed the setup, noting that similar events (like HRCE’s Muthamizh Murugan Maanadu) had previously taken place without issue.

With the legal hurdles cleared, the stage is set for one of Tamil Nadu’s largest Hindu gatherings in recent years. The event is expected to draw lakhs of devotees, spiritual leaders, and political figures, including invites to CM Stalin, AIADMK’s EPS, and actor Rajinikanth.

(With inputs from The New Indian Express)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Relaxes Conditions For Hindu Munnani’s Muruga Bakthargal Maanadu appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently ruled that granting Scheduled Caste (SC) status to a Christian amounts to a constitutional violation. As a result, the court disqualified AIADMK member V. Amutha Rani from her position as chairperson of the Theroor town panchayat in Kanniyakumari district. The post was reserved for candidates from the SC community.

Justice L. Victoria Gowri delivered the judgment in response to a petition filed by DMK ward member V. Iyyappan, who had contested the same post. According to the court, although Amutha Rani was born into the Hindu Pallar community—recognized as an SC group—she married a Christian man from the Backward Class category in 2005 under the Indian Christian Marriage Act. This law permits marriage solely between individuals who identify as Christians.

The judge rejected Rani’s argument that she had neither been baptized nor formally converted to Christianity. The court held that by choosing to marry under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, Rani had effectively adopted Christianity, thereby renouncing her original religion.

As per the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, individuals practicing religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism are not eligible for Scheduled Caste status. Given that the panchayat chairperson is a public office, this legal restriction applies to Rani as well. Consequently, the court ruled that she could not claim to be a Hindu or avail the benefits reserved for Scheduled Castes in public appointments.

(With Inputs From TNIE)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally

The post Madurai Bench Disqualifies Panchayat Chairperson, Rules SC Status Not Applicable To Christians appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has sought a response from the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging a circular that prohibits the inclusion of caste names in temple festival invitations.

The PIL was filed by G. Ramalingam, a devotee of the historic Baskareswarar Temple in Thanjavur, which was established over 1,100 years ago during the Chola period. According to the petitioner, the 10-day annual festival currently underway at the temple faced an unexpected hurdle when organizers became aware of the HR & CE circular restricting the mention of caste or family names of sponsors in invitation materials.

Ramalingam contended that the practice of including such names has been a long-standing tradition and an integral part of temple customs. He argued that the circular infringes upon these age-old practices and cited that it was issued following a Madras High Court order related to the Pattukkottai Nadiamman temple festival. However, he pointed out that the Supreme Court has already stayed that specific order on 24 March 2025.

In light of this, the petitioner urged the High Court to stay or quash the circular. While the division bench declined to stay the circular’s operation, it directed the HR & CE Department to file a detailed response within four weeks.

(With inputs from The New Indian Express)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Seeks HR&CE Response On PIL Challenging Ban On Caste Names In Temple Invitations appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, on 23 October 2024, directed the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and Tamil Nadu’s Chief Secretary to present their stance on creating a statutory body to regulate Christian institutions. Justice N Sathish Kumar issued the directive while hearing multiple petitions related to the appointment of a correspondent at Scott Christian College, Kanniyakumari, and the handling of employee salaries.

The judge highlighted that, unlike Hindu and Muslim charitable endowments, Christian institutions lack comprehensive statutory regulation. He observed that the court has encountered frequent instances of mismanagement and misuse of church assets and funds, often used by those in power to defend their positions through litigation. Although courts periodically appoint temporary administrators, the judge emphasized the need for a permanent statutory board to ensure accountability in Christian institutions.

The petitions included one filed by Baiju Nijat Pal from Nagercoil, who claimed a court order to appoint him as college correspondent had not been implemented. The judge also addressed accusations against a CSI bishop for allegedly blocking an appointment without proven grounds, noting that such arbitrary decisions seemed to stem from internal rules meant to maintain control over the administration.

Justice Kumar stressed the importance of safeguarding assets and funds of Christian institutions, given their significant public contributions to education and healthcare. He concluded by directing the Union and state governments to submit detailed reports on establishing a regulatory board for Christian institutions and adjourned the case to 18 November 2024 for further hearing.

(With inputs from TNIE)

Subscribe to our Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram channels and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Madurai Bench Of Madras HC Seeks Centre, TN Response On Regulatory Body For Christian Institutions, Cites Fund Misuse appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai bench of the High Court has raised serious concerns over the steep darshan fees charged at the Thiruchendur Subramaniaswamy Temple during the Kanda Sashti festival. In response to a petition filed by Ramkumar Adithan of Tiruchendur, the court has issued a notice to the Tamil Nadu government seeking clarification on the order allowing additional fees to be levied during the festival.

Kanda Sashti, celebrated for six days at the Tiruchendur temple, draws over one lakh devotees each day. While the temple generally offers free darshan, a quick darshan option is available for ₹100 fees on regular days. However, the fee is doubled to ₹200 on special days. Last year, during the Kanda Sashti festival, the quick darshan fee was hiked to ₹1,000 per person, leading to widespread protests from around 200 devotees, who were subsequently arrested. Following the backlash, the temple administration rolled back the additional charge.

In his petition, Ramkumar Adithan objected to reintroducing the ₹1,000 quick darshan fee for this year’s Kanda Sashti festival, arguing that such a high charge would make it difficult for poorer devotees to worship. He proposed that the temple administration should issue advance tokens through an Aadhaar-based online system to manage the crowd instead of charging exorbitant fees.

During the hearing, Justices Subramanian and Victoria Gowri sharply questioned the rationale behind the high fees. “If the darshan fee is one thousand or two thousand rupees, how will poor people have darshan?” they asked. “Can they afford this amount? Shouldn’t poor people also be able to worship? Is the temple only for the rich?“

The court has ordered the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Commissioner and the Thoothukudi District Collector to respond to these concerns and adjourned the case until 7 November 2024.

(With inputs from OneIndia Tamil)

Subscribe to our Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram channels and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Is The Temple Only For The Rich?” Madurai Bench Of Madras HC Lambasts HR&CE Dept Over High Darshan Fees At Thiruchendur Temple During Kanda Sashti Festival appeared first on The Commune.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has sharply criticized the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department of the DMK government for failing to properly maintain temples under its control, particularly the historic Rameswaram Ramanatha Swamy Temple. The court likened the department’s functioning to that of “Vasool Raja MBBS jobs,” implying that the department is more focused on revenue collection than on temple upkeep and filling crucial vacancies.

The remarks were made during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by lawyer Yanai Rajendran, who sought to fill the vacant posts of priests and officers at the Rameswaram temple. Rajendran highlighted that, according to regulations, the temple should have 12 priests (Gurus) and 19 assistant priests. However, only 2 priests and 7 assistants are currently employed. Additionally, he noted that 42 other key positions, including that of Bhagavatars, remain unfilled.

Rajendran pointed out that despite the temple generating more than ₹90 crore annually, the HR&CE Department has neglected its responsibilities, particularly in maintaining temple operations and filling vacancies. He argued that the lack of adequate staff is affecting the conduct of daily rituals and pujas, which are vital to the temple’s spiritual and cultural activities.

The bench, comprising Justices Subramanian and Victoria, questioned the HR&CE Department about the sanctioned number of priests and staff for the Rameswaram temple and how many were actually employed. The court also sought details on the temple’s annual income and expenditure, ordering the department to submit a comprehensive report addressing these issues.

The Rameswaram Ramanatha Swamy Temple is one of the most revered and ancient temples in Tamil Nadu, attracting thousands of devotees daily, especially on auspicious days. The PIL has brought to light broader concerns about the HR&CE Department’s oversight and the overall condition of temple maintenance across the state.

The court’s directive is seen as a critical step toward ensuring that the necessary appointments are made to restore the temple’s operations to full capacity.

#BREAKING || அறநிலையத்துறை மீது நீதிபதிகள் கடும் விமர்சனம்

"இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை கோவில்களை முறையாக பராமரிப்பது இல்லை, வசூல்ராஜா எம்பிபிஎஸ் வேலை மட்டுமே செய்கிறது"

மெட்ராஸ் உயர்நீதிமன்ற மதுரை அமர்வு விமர்சனம்#HighCourtMaduraiBench #ThanthiTV pic.twitter.com/NCLlJuEKAP

— Thanthi TV (@ThanthiTV) September 26, 2024

(With inputs from OneIndia Tamil)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “HR&CE Doing The Work Of Vasool Raja”: Madurai Bench Of Madras HC Slams TN HR&CE Department For Neglecting Temple Maintenance appeared first on The Commune.