Disposed

Rangarajan Narasimhan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC23 Mar 2023WP/14950/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two writ petitions challenging government interference in the administration of Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple, specifically regarding the appointment of fit persons and the conduct of religious festivals.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to approach this court if any violation is committed by respondent authorities. No costs.

Rangarajan Narasimhan Vs The State of Tamil… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 23.03.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶7

W.P.No.14950 of 2017:

¶8

Rangarajan Narasimhan

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

-vs-

¶11

1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary Department of Tamil Development

¶12

Culture, Religious Endowments & Information Secretariat, Fort St. George

¶13

Chennai-600 009

¶14

2.The Commissioner

¶15

Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department Uthamar Gandhi Salai Nungambakkam

¶16

Chennai-600 034

¶17

3.The Joint Commissioner HR & CE, Thanjavur

¶18

1/10

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶21

4.K.Krishnakumar

¶22

Executive Officer

¶23

Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple Thirukkannapuram Nagapattinam

¶24

5.The Board of Trustees / Fit Person Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple Thirukkannapuram, Nagapattinam

¶25

... Respondents

¶26

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the second respondent from appointing any Government servant as a “fit-person” and direct the TN HR & CE Department to appoint only such persons who are knowledgeable about Sri Vaishnava Sampradhaya, Agama Shastras, established custom and usage of the temple in consultation with the temple Archakas and Acharyas of Sri Vaishnava Sampradhaya appointed by Swamy Ramanujacharya and Swami Manavala Mamunigal as trustees of Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple, Thirukkannapuram.

¶27

For Petitioner : Mr.Rangarajan Narasimhan Party-in-Person

¶28

For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader (HR&CE) for R1 to R3 Mr.R.Bharanidharan for R4 & R5

¶29

W.P.No.19698 of 2021:

¶30

Venkatesh Sowrirajan ... Petitioner

¶31

-vs-

¶32

2/10

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶35

1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary Department of Tamil Development Culture, Religious Endowments & Information Secretariat, Fort St. George Chennai-600 009 2.The Commissioner Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department Uthamar Gandhi Salai Nungambakkam Chennai-600 034 3.The Executive Officer Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple Thirukkannapuram Nagapattinam 4.The Joint Commissioner HR & CE, Nagapattinam 5.The Board of Trustees / Fit Person Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple Thirukkannapuram Nagapattinam ... Respondents

¶36

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from in any manner interfering in the religious affairs, established customs and usage and non-secular affairs of Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple, Thirukkannapuram and consequently to form a Utsava Committee to decide on the modus operandi to conduct the upcoming utsavams in the forseeable future as prescribed by Agama Sashtras and Shri

¶37

3/10

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶40

Vaishnava Sampradhayam with inputs from eminent Shri Vaishnavites

¶41

comprising of Jeeyars, Sthalathars, Theerthakaras, Acharya purushas, adhyapakas, Shri Vaishnava Sampradhaya devotees (Sishyas) with respondents playing an administrative role.

¶42

For Petitioner : Ms.N.V.Lakshmi

¶43

For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader (HR&CE) for R1, R2 & R4 Mr.R.Bharanidharan for R3 & R5

¶44

COMMON ORDER

¶45

[Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.]

¶46

Both the writ petitions are filed relating to the issues concerning the

¶47

temple by name Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple, Thirukannapuram, Nagapattinam District. For the sake of convenience, the reliefs sought therein read as follows:

¶48

WP.No.14950 of 2017

¶49

To forbear the Commissioner, HR&CE Department, Chennai from appointing any government servant as a fit person and direct the department to appoint only such persons, who are having knowledge about Vaishnava

¶50

4/10

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶53

Sampradhaya, Agama Shastras, established custom and usage of the temple in consultation with the Archakas and Acharyas of Sri Vaishnava Sampradhaya appointed by Swamy Ramanujacharya and Swami Manavala Mamunigal as trustees of the subject temple.

¶54

WP.No.19698 of 2021

¶55

To forbear the respondents from in any manner interfering with the religious affairs, established customs and usage and non-secular affairs of the subject temple and consequently, form a Committee to decide on the modus operandi to conduct various upcoming Utsavams in the foreseeable future as prescribed by Agama Shastras and Shri Vaishnava Sampradhayam with inputs from eminent Vaishnavites comprising of Jeeyars, Sthalathars, Theerthakaras, Acharya Purushas, Adhyapakas, Shri Vaishnava Sampradhaya Devotees with the respondents.

¶56

2.According to the petitioners, the subject temple viz., Shri Sowriraja Perumal Temple situated at Thirukkannapuram, Nagapattinam District, Tamil Nadu, is an ancient temple and is one of the 108 Divya Desams. This temple has a rare distinction of 5 Azhwars viz., Nammazhwar, Periyazhwar, Kulasekara Azhwar, Thirumangai Azhwar and Andal, singing in praise of the

¶57

5/10

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶59

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶60

presiding deity, Shri Sowriraja Perumal and a total of 120 songs out of 4000, are dedicated to this Divya Desam. It is believed by Vaishnavites that Shri Sowriraja Perumal grants salvation to those, who take refuge (complete surrender) under him.

¶61

3.It is averred by the petitioner in WP.No.14950 of 2017 that every year, the Brahmotsavam of Shri Sowriraja Perumal is conducted in the Tamil month of Vaikasi, i.e., 9th day of the Utsavam coincides with Pournami. However, during the year 2017, without any reason, the Executive Officer of the temple cancelled the Brahmotsavam and also Balalayam of the temple, in violation of the Agama principles, thereby causing serious hurt to the religious sentiments to the people as well as Vaishnavites across the world. It is further averred that the religious affairs of the temple are absolute domain of the hereditary trustees / nonhereditary trustees / Board of Trustees of the temple in consultation with the

¶62

Acharyas appointed by Swami Ramanujacharya and Swami Manavalamamunigal, Jeeyars, scholars and members of the religious community; and only the secular aspects of the temple management and its properties fall within the ambit of the provisions of the HR&CE Act. But, the fourth respondent, who is the Executive Officer of the temple, has misused his powers

¶63

6/10

¶64

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶65

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶66

and interfered with the religious affairs of the subject temple. It is further alleged that the fourth respondent has converted the temple and its Utsavas into a money making machinery by collecting money from the people / devotees under the guise of renovation and conducting Balalayam. Therefore, this writ petition viz., WP.No.14950 of 2017.

¶67

4.The petitioner in WP.No.19698 of 2021 stated that despite the request made by him and various devotees, the Executive Officer of the temple, did not take steps to conduct the Utsavam and decided on his own that the same need not be performed. It is further stated that the Brahmotsavam is integral part of the religious activities, customs and usage of the temple and the same cannot be disturbed by anyone; and that, all the Priests, Acharyas and the Ubayadharars (donors), are insisting the officials of the HR&CE Department to conduct Utsavam as per Agama Shastras, but nothing forthcoming. Therefore, this writ petition viz., WP.No.19698 of 2021.

¶68

5.However, during the course of hearing, the petitioner in WP.No. 14950 of 2017 as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner in WP.No.19698 of 2021 submitted that it would meet the ends of justice, if the respondent authorities are

¶69

7/10

¶70

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶71

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶72

not interfering with the affairs of the temple administration and that, the appointment of fit person, if any, should be knowledgeable about the customs and practice followed by the subject temple.

¶73

6.As a riposte, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the HR&CE Department, on instructions from Mr.T.V.Gunasekaran, Grade-II Executive Officer of the subject temple, who is present in the Court, submitted that there is no interference by the respondent authorities in the religious affairs of the subject temple; and the fit persons are appointed in accordance with the prevailing rules.

¶74

7.Recording the above submissions, the writ petitions are disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court, if there is any violation committed by the respondent authorities. No costs.

¶75

[R.M.D., J.] [P.D.A., J.] 23.03.2023

¶76

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No krk

¶77

8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶78

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶79

¶80

1.The Secretary, Department of Tamil Development Culture, Religious Endowments & Information, State of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶81

2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

¶82

3.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE, Thanjavur.

¶83

4.The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE, Nagapattinam.

¶84

9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶85

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 and 19698 of 2021

¶86

R.MAHADEVAN, J. and P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.

¶87

krk

¶88

W.P.Nos.14950 of 2017 & 19698 of 2021

¶89

23.03.2023

¶90

10/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Rangarajan Narasimhan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rangarajan Narasimhan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Venkataraman Vs The Cheif Secretary to Government

Rangarajan Narasimhan Vs Abhay Kumar Singh, IPS

T. Manohar Vs the Principal Secretary

K.v.Srinivasan Iyer Vs R.Venkataraman

R.Sivan Vs the Presiding Officer

The Chief Secretary Vs The Director