Madras High Court
R.Sivabalasubramanian vs The Commissioner on 4 April, 2025
Author: S.Srimathy
Bench: J. Nisha Banu, S.Srimathy
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 29.04.2025
PRONOUNCED ON: 24.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.4092, 6719 and 6720 of 2025
W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025:
R.Sivabalasubramanian ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Chennai.
2.The State Level Expert Committee,
Represented by the Additional Commissioner (Thirupani),
Office of the Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Chennai.
3.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Thoothukudi.
4.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
Page No.1 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
5.Yagnanarayanan,
Assistant Commissioner (In-charge),
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
6.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathaswamy Temple,
Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
7.S.Devarajan ... Respondents
(R7 is impleaded, vide Court order, dated 04.04.2025, in
W.M.P.(MD)No.6935 of 2025 in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025)
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3
to take action on the report of the 5th respondent in Na.Ka.No.2556/2024/A2,
dated 15.02.2025 and complete the entire works sanctioned by the 2nd respondent
and thereafter, perform the consecration ceremony of Arulmigu Kasiviswanatha
Swamy Temple, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick
For R1 to R5 : Mr.Veera Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
assisted b Mr.P.Thilak Kumar
Government Pleader
For R6 : Mr.S.Madhavan
Standing Counsel
For R7 : Mr.K.Gokul
Advocate Commissioner : M/s. J.Anandhavalli
Page No.2 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025:
M.Nambirajan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Nungambakkam, Chennai.
2.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Thoothukudi.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Tenkasi.
4.State Level Expert Committee,
Represented by its Additional Commissioner,
Office of the Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department,
Thoothukudi.
5.The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathar Thirukovil,
Tenkasi.
6.R. Murugan,
Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathar Thirukovil,
Tenkasi. ... Respondents
(R7 is impleaded, vide Court order, dated
04.04.2025, in W.M.P.(MD)No.6935 of 2025
in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025)
Page No.3 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1, 2
and 4 to take appropriate action of the report submitted by the 3rd respondent in
his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2556/2024/A4, dated 15.02.2025 and thereafter, to
conduct Kumbabikisheham of Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathar Swamy Temple,
Tenkasi, within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
For R1 to R4 : Mr.Veera Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
assisted by Mr.P.Thilak Kumar
Government Pleader
For R5 and R6 : Mr.S.Madhavan
Standing Counsel
***
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was delivered by S.SRIMATHY, J.) Since the issues involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, they are taken up together and a common order is passed.
2.(i). The writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take action on the report of the 5th respondent, dated 15.02.2025 and to complete the entire works Page No.4 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 sanctioned by the 2nd respondent and thereafter, perform the Kumbabishekam of Arulmigu Kasiviswanathaswamy Temple.
(ii) Writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025 is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1, 2 and 4 to take appropriate action on the report submitted by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings, dated 15.02.2025, in Na.Ka.No.2556/2024/A4, and thereafter conduct Kumbabishekam in Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathar Swamy Temple within stipulated time.
3.The brief facts, as stated in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 are that the petitioner is a resident of Kadayanallur, a devotee of Kasi Viswanathaswamy Temple, situated in the heart of the city of Tenkasi. He is also serving as District President of Hindu Alaya Pathukappu Iyakkam and engaged in ulavarapani of temples. Hence, he is an interested person under Section 15(b) of the HR and CE Act.
3.1. The King Arikesari Parakrama Pandyan had laid the foundation to construct the temple on 06.05.1446 and Kumbabishekam took place on 10.06.1447, then the construction progressed from 30.11.1457 till 1463. In the year 1474, the temple Tower was constructed and Kumbabishekam was Page No.5 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 performed. At the entrance of Rajagopuram, inscription in Tamil verses, which dates back to 14th and 15th century, describes about the King Parakrama Pandyan and Arikesari and their charities.
3.2. The temple tower consists of nine stages measuring a height of 178 feet, the Rajagopuram is made of stone raising up to 30 feet and a 2.5 feet wide path has been situated in the 9th level to see the natural beauty of Tenkasi. The huge appearance of the temple shows the antiquity, culture and heritage value of the temple. The last Kumbabishekam was performed in the year 2006. After 18 years in the month of February 2024, “balalayam” was performed signalling the beginning of work for Kumbabishekam and a sum of Rs.1.5 Crore/- was sanctioned by the Government for the purpose of renovation of the temple. On 10.01.2023, the State Level Committee conducted a meeting and granted permission for the following works:
Page No.6 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
1) (1) renovation of Raja Gopuram, (2) fixing the crack in the wall of the Rajagopuram, (3) repair of electrical works in first level to ninth level of Rajagopuram, (4) checking minor repairs in RCC beam of Rajagopuram, (5) repair of water leakages especially on the west side walls of 5th to 9th level of Rajagopuram (6) replacement of iron weight placed on the gate from 2nd level to 9th level of Rajagopuram with wooden gate, (7) replacement of the steel gate of Dwara Koshta from 2nd level to 9th level of Rajagopuram with wooden gate, (8) Fixing the ground floor of the Rajagopuram that has gone down, (9) laying of clay tile in the empty area ofthe door of each stage of the Rajagopuram, (10) repair and painting of entire Rajagopuram in panchavarnam.
2) repair work in the temple roof,
3) painting work of Sala Gopurams and Rajagopurams, Vimanas of Swami, Ambal, Subramaniyar and Parivar deities.
4) laying of the black stone on the floor,
5) replacement of stones in the sanctum of Amman,
6) cleaning work of the lime stones in the black stones of the temple with water and
laying the fence with lime mixture,
7) Repair and renovation of wall,
8) Removal of modern constructions in temple complex,
9) Rebuilding of Madapalli stairs,
10) construction of a new black stone floor after removing the cement concrete floor of
the temple,
11) Removal of modern ceramic stones embedded in temple shrines,
12) Repair and reconstruction of the drainage walls in the outer praharam of the temple.
Page No.7 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm )
W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even after passing of the Resolution by the 2nd respondent, the 6th respondent has not fixed the leakage on the 5th to 9th level of Rajagopuram and without such repair, the painting works are being completed. Further, the crack in the entrance black granite stone was not repaired. When the same was questioned by the petitioner and other devotees, the 6th respondent has lethargically replied to prefer a complaint to officials. As apprehended, the black granite has fallen four times and fortunately, there was no injury to the policeman, who was on duty in the Rajagopuram. Hence, one of the devotees submitted a representation, dated 12.02.2024, to the respondents 1, 3 and 4 requesting to do renovation work by strictly adhering to the Resolutions, dated 10.01.2023.
5. Based on the above representation, dated 12.02.2024, the 4th respondent, vide proceedings, dated 23.04.2024, has directed the 6th respondent to take action on the representation, but the 6th respondent did not bother to take action but continued the painting works and completed it without attending to the repair works. Further huge quantities of sand from the outer praharam had been excavated and sold to 3rd party lorry owners. Furthermore, there are allegations of misappropriation of temple funds, giving concession to the temple tenants, receiving fund from donors and not doing work as requested by the donors in Page No.8 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 terms of the report of the 2nd respondent. The 6th respondent is not prepared to give accounts for renovation even to donors who came forward to do the work.In view of the same, many donors are not willing to come forward for contributing towards the renovation works, that is being carried under the supervision of 6th respondent.
6. The donors, who are also the devotees of the temple, are presently doing the work assigned to them but the entire work is not completed as on date. Meanwhile, in a hurried manner, the date for the Kumbabishekam festival is fixed on 07.04.2025. Therefore, several representations were sent by various persons citing the incompletion of work, misappropriation of funds, excavation of sand, giving concession to temple tenants and receiving fund from the donors but not doing the work as requested by the donors. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the 6th respondent has also attempted to put up a steel gate in front of the temple without the sanction of the 2nd respondent that too by encroaching highways land obstructing the devotees’ ingress and egress.
7. Pursuant to the above, the 5th respondent who had served in the said temple earlier in the place of the 6th respondent, had thoroughly enquired the allegations levelled against the 6th respondent and found that prima facie the Page No.9 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 allegations are true. Hence, the 5th respondent, vide proceedings, dated 15.02.2025, referred the allegations and raised the issue to the 3rd respondent. The said report also clearly expressed the fact that the procedure adopted by the 6th respondent is not up to the standard prescribed by the 2 nd respondent. The report further expressed the displeasure and lethargic attitude and also stated that within 07.04.2025, the works cannot be completed. In fact, the 2 nd respondent personally visited the temple and found the incomplete works and orally informed that action would be taken. But without taking any action, the works for Kumbabishekam is being proceeded. Hence, the present writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 is filed.
8. The brief facts as stated in W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025 are that the petitioner was born and brought up at Tenkasi, his family generation together are native of Tenkasi, all auspicious functions are conducted after the blessings from the deities, ardent devotees of the temple and he is also one of the members of Sivanadiyar attending all functions of the temple. He is also doing uzhavarapani in maintaining the temple and his basic avocation is doing electrical work. The temple attracts tourist, pilgrims and has uniqueness where the wind blow in the opposite direction while entering Rajagopuram and vice versa while exiting the temple. The temple was built during the mid of 14th century by Pandian King Page No.10 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 namely Parakirama Pandian, who brought holy water from Kasi and mixed in the temple well and the same is given to devotees as Kasi Theertham. As the temple is a centuries old temple, it comes under the supervision of Archaeological Survey of India and it is also one of the heritage temples worshipped round the year.
9. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the temple’s vacant plinth area is the place where the pilgrims after worshipping the deity, would sit and relax in the ambience of the Temple. The last Kumbabishekam took place in the year 2006. It is the further contention of the petitioner that under the guise of renovation, the respondents have dug huge lumps of earth and the soil beneath the vacant plinth area and transported the same illegally by more than 1000 tractors on the oral direction of 6th respondent/Executive Officer. Hence, the place became unsuitable for the devotees to sit. That apart, removal of soil by JCB has caused the structure of the temple shaken and spoiled, since care and precaution was not taken by the 5th respondent.
10. The 4th respondent conducted a meeting on 10.01.2023 to ascertain the safety and measures to be adopted for renovation of outer walls followed with a meeting held on 14.07.2023 for new construction of Annadhana Koodam. Based on the report, an estimation was arrived at and the Government had Page No.11 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 sanctioned funds for renovation. In order to perform the Kumbabishekam, the preliminary information was given to the devotees by performing Balalayam during the month of February 2024 and the Government released the information for fund raising. Thereafter, complaints started pouring in against the temple authorities for dereliction of duty and misappropriation of funds, the impoper conduct of rennovation work, which was done in a hurried manner without adopting proper safety techniques in protecting the temple pillars and monuments, more specifically, the leakage in the Rajagopuram, which was not carried out but the painting work of the Rajagopuram was completed.
11. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the above actions have not only swindled the Government money but also the stability of Rajagopuram which will fade in the coming years due to improper maintenance, which will definitely turn as a threat to the devotees and general public at large. Based on the complaints, the 3rd respondent conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted a report, dated 15.02.2025, highlighting the improper work as well as misappropriation of funds. The said report also indicated that if works are done in a day-to-day basis, then the same can be completed before the date of Kumbakishekam i.e., 07.04.2025 and also listed out the ratio-wise works to be completed. Even after the receipt of such report, the 2nd respondent Joint Page No.12 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Commissioner has not taken any steps to prevent the misappropriation as well as wastage of utilization of funds.
12. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the paramount importance of temple safety was not taken care and the respondents are proceeding to perform Kumbabishekam in a hurried manner. The petitioner's endeavour is not to stall the Kumbabishekam but to highlight that without carrying proper rennovation work, the respondents are hurriedly performing the Kumbabishekam. Hence, the petitioner preferred a detailed complaint, dated 14.03.2025, through registered post. Till date no action was taken for the same. Aggrieved against the same, the present writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.8890 of 2025 is filed.
13. The 6th respondent in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 has filed a counter denying all the averments and stated that in the month of February, 2024, the Balalayam was performed and Kumbabishekam was planned on 07.04.2025 for the renovation work. The Government has also sanctioned a sum of Rs.1.5 Crores and the 2nd respondent conducted a meeting and granted permission to do the respective renovation works. Based on the same, the 6th respondent started the renovation works after getting approval from the concerned authorities. The Page No.13 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 allegation against the 6th respondent is denied and the renovation works are being carried out in terms of order passed in Suo motu writ petition in W.P.No.574 of 2015, dated 07.06.2021 and the resolution passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 10.01.2023. The present Executive Officer was appointed on 27.02.2025 and is looking after the administration and renovation works. The erstwhile Executive Officer Murugan was transferred, vide order of the 1st respondent, dated 27.02.2025. Almost all the renovation works have been completed and only a few tasks and works will have to be completed in time well before the scheduled date of Kumbabishekam on 07.04.2025. The report of the 5th respondent, dated 15.02.2025, was already considered by the 1st respondent, thereafter, the 6th respondent was appointed to look after the renovation work. All the pending renovation works are being done in full fledged manner. Hence, the 6th respondent prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
14. Heard Mr.R.J.Karthick, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025, Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025, Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 5 in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 and respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025, Mr.S.Madhavan, Page No.14 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 learned standing counsel appearing for the 6th respondent in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 and 5th and 6th respondents in W.P.(MD)No.8990 of 2025 and Mr.K.Gokul, learned counsel for 7th respondent in W.P.(MD)No.5596 of 2025 and Ms.J.Anandhavalli, learned Advocate Commissioner and perused the reports and documents.
15. When the case was listed on 03.04.2025, this Court was inclined to grant interim order of stay thereby staying to conduct the kumbabhishekam, but the respondents vehemently objected and sought time until the next day in order to produce evidence and photos. Hence, the case was posted on the next day, i.e. on 04.04.2025. On 04.04.2025 this Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner and also directed the Director of IIT Madras to depute two persons to make inspection of the Temple, Rajagopuram and other works undertaken thereon and also directed to file a report on 21.04.2025. Based on the direction of this Court the two IIT Professors and the Advocate Commissioner had inspected the temple on 18.04.2025 and has filed a detailed report 21.04.2025 along with photos.
16. The report filed by the Advocate Commissioner was supported with photos which envisage the fact that the works are not completed, in particular, the renovation work at the Rajagopuram, Kasi Visawanathar Mandapam (Sannathi) Page No.15 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 and Amman Mandapam. It is further stated in the report that major works were completed for the performance of Kumbabishekam but still there are renovation works, which are yet to be completed. The report further states that unless the damages found in Kasi Visawanathar Mandapam, Amman Mandapam and the Kalasam in Rajagopuram are carried out, it cannot be stated that the renovation work is completed. There are fractured portions in the Rajagopuram, the interior portion of Rajagopuram, Amman Sannathi and Swami Sannathi, where 63 Nayanmars are shrined, the seepage of water is visible on the walls and the experts also opined this portion ought to be rectified by using correct materials with consultation of the expert to prevent such seepage in future. As far as electrification work is concerned, the same is in dangerous condition. The temple has a history of fire accidents, which continued for more than a year. Moreover, Tenkasi is a place where heavy downpour of rainfall would be experienced during several months. Due to the rainfall, electrical short circuit in the temple may happen and the same is dangerous not only to the temple but also to the devotees.
17. This Court perused the order passed in W.P.No.574 of 2015 dated 07.06.2021, wherein at paragraph no.55, it is held that formation of Expert Committee is mandatory in pursuant of the said order to protect temples. The Page No.16 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 relevant portion of the report of the Advocate Commissioner is extracted hereunder:
“ The permission that has been granted by the State Level Expert Committee dated 10.1.2023 which is annexed at the typeset of papers in W.P(MD) No. 8990 of 2025 starts from page number 18 to 21 has not been done in the temple, the photos filed along with this report and the findings of the experts in their report clearly proves that serial no. 1 (sub-divisions 1 to 10) are not being completed fully, in respect of the serial number 1(10) only painting had taken place. Likewise serial number 4, 7, 10, 11, 12 though permitted by the committee, not even commenced.
I am informed that renovation works in the temple are also being done by donor work. The donors are allowed to do the work with their own Sthapathis and labours and there is no check by the department whether these works are being done as per the specifications. I am also informed that if the same is questioned, there is apprehension that there is threat for continuation for the donor work. Therefore, it has become a practice to do the work at the whims and fancies of the donors. With these types of works, dates are being fixed for Kumbhabhishegam without any certificate from the department for the completion of the work as specified and permitted by the Department and State Level Expert Committee. The expert also opined the same view in their concluding remarks.”
18. The Professors of IIT Madras namely Mr.Manu Santhanam and Mr.Arun Menon have submitted a separate report. The report states that the Page No.17 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Centre for Urbanisation, Buildings and Environment (CUBE), IIT Madras was engaged by HR&CE for distress mapping and a detailed project report to the temple was submitted during the month of December 2022. After due approval from State Expert Committee, the conservation works were undertaken by the temple on 23.03.2024 for Rajagopuram, while the rest of the works began in July 2024. The Kubabhishekam was proposed to be held on 07.04.2025, approximately nine months from the start of rennovation work. The report further states as under:
i. Though the Rajagopuram is stable, the plinth adjoining the entrance pathway is showing some subsidence, repointing of joints in the current conservation work. This is attributable possibly to the absence of a foundation in the central plinth with foundation provided only along the walls of kalkaram. Recent works have only filled up the widened joints between stones.
ii. There are two horizontal cracks, the date of installation of glass tell- tales is written in the vicinity of crack, but no periodic crack measurements are available and not recorded by the engineer. iii. In Rajagopuram the signs of water seepage and related wet patches on the paint and plaster are seen at almost all levels. This is already recorded in CUBE’s report, but the same is inadequately addressed. iv. The RC elements of Rajagopuram are heavily affected by corrosion which was already given in the CUBE’s report. But only patch repairs undertaken, hence corrosion effects would be progressing if systematic corrosion repair was not undertaken. And sources of corrosion have not been carefully addressed in the conversation work. Damp patches are Page No.18 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 seen in the walls of all the tiers of Rajagopuram, central portion of floor slab in each floor have significant rainwater. There is no adequate run off of rain water.
v. Conservation work on the Thirukalyana Mandapam involved removal of accretionary modern tiles and infill brick walls contracted between the stone pillars in the recent past. The removal of accretionary infill walls was carried out with the use of heavy machinery, leading to structural damage in stone pillars and roof slab. The structural repairs adopted are unsympathetic to the historic nature of the stone mandapam. In other locations, existing cracks have further propagated in the stone pillars compromising the safety of the portion of the mandapam. Existing cracks in the tone slabs of the roof (pavukkal) have only been patched with mortar and fresh cracks have developed in several locations. Undulations in the stone beams can be seen in the mandapam, indicating possible subsidence of plinth in the past. These existing undulations and the use of heavy machinery to remove infill brick walls have increased the distress in the mandapam, requiring urgent interventions to ensure safety of pilgrims.
vi. Water seepage from roof is still evident in different parts of the temple, it is seen in Ulagamman shrine and fresh cracks are also visible in some locations. The repair works undertaken on the terrace apparently has involved only replacement of the terracotta tiles, which is only the final layer of defence against rainwater seepage. The actual waterproofing layer (lime concrete and mortar layer with additives such as kadukkai and jaggery) appears to be depleted or deteriorated, continuing to allow seepage of water into the structure. Attention to Page No.19 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 waterproofing works is clearly missing, staining of the stone walls is evident due to the absence of a parapet wall or at least a drip mould, absence of corner detailing and flashing of the waterproofing layer into the parapet wall, lack of provision of metal grating at the mouth of the rainwater down take pipe are all reasons for the seepage of rainwater into the structure. The wrong practice of supporting metal props and braces directly on finished waterproofing layer, without a wooden or rubber pad, damage the terrace finish and aggravate rainwater seepage. vii. While vegetation removal has been carried out systematically in some instances (in others there is incomplete removal of the plants), filling up of voids left by roots and shoots and removal and replacement of depleted joint mortar has not been carried out either appropriately or adequately. Wide gaps can still be seen in joints in the stone masonry, which are locations for future growth of vegetation and ingress of rainwater. Elsewhere, the repointing with lime mortar is clearly superficial and without removal of the existing cement or combination mortars.
viii. The site rainwater drainage works are incomplete and executed with little attention. Concrete paving has been adopted in prakaram pathway with no rainwater drainage facility at all. The absence of coping for the prakaram walls has led to staining of the stone masonry ix. Conservation works in parts of the historical temple with inscriptions is inappropriate. Cement pointing is used in the masonry joints disfiguring the inscription. So is the case with locations where new granite flooring has been laid. A portion of the Thiru Ulaga Mandapam has been damaged due to impact from a falling tree in recent rains.Page No.20 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Repairs are yet to be taken up in the affected portion. In the same structure, gaps in the masonry wall and mortar joints have not been attended to completely. Several stone slabs in the location outside the main shrine have cracked and are in a precarious condition, and could cause harm to the devotees walking underneath; these need immediate repair. The boundary wall of the inner courtyard has bulged out in several locations, leading to concerns regarding its stability. Some buttressing has been done at a location where heavy vegetation growth was seen earlier, but neither has the vegetation been cleared properly nor has the buttressing been done to the required depth which is stated as per the member of the Stapathi's team.
19. After pointing out the aforesaid incomplete, inadequate and haphazard conservation / renovation works, the report was concluded by stating the remarks and recommendations that are necessary for the completion of conservation works. Even though the cleaning of stone surfaces, removal of modern accretions, removal of vegetations, ensuring watertight roofs and walls are taken up, they are not executed satisfactorily. Even though Rajagopuram appears to be stable, the horizontal cracks in the nelaikal of kalkaram and the subsidence of the plinth on the either sides of the central pathway need to be monitored and appropriate structural interventions ought to be undertaken to ensure no further worsening of distress. The relevant portion is as follows:Page No.21 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 “CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The conservation works carried out between July 2024 and March 2025 in Alm. Kasi Viswanathar Temple in Tenkasi appear to be rushed and not thoroughly executed. While aspects such as removal of modern accretions, cleaning of stone surfaces, removal of vegetation and ensuring watertight roofs and walls have been taken up as approved by the State Level Expert Committee of HR&CE in 2023, the adopted method for removal of modern accretions, and the rigour and quality of the works related to waterproofing, structural repairs in the Rajagopuram and consolidation of prakaram walls are not satisfactory.
2. The kalkaram of the Rajagopuram appears to be stable.
However, the observed horizontal cracks in the nelaikaal in the kalkaram, and the subsidence of the plinth on either sides of the central pathway need to be monitored and appropriate structural interventions undertaken to ensure no further worsening of the distress.
3. The portion of the Rajagopuram from the first to the ninth nelai, which is a modern construction in reinforced concrete with brick walls is not watertight. Large openings at each floor permit ample rainwater into the structure with stagnation on each floor, apart from rainwater seeping in through crevices from the exterior. This situation is responsible for the extensive corrosion of RC beams and slabs in the structure, which have only been attended through patch repairs in the recent conservation work. Measures to prevent ingress of rainwater into the Rajagopuram by providing protection of the large openings, and adequate detailing of waterproofing exterior surfaces must be revisited. Page No.22 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Thorough structural assessment of the RC members should be carried out to undertake appropriate repairs after the aforementioned measures are put in place.
4. The condition of the cracked pillars of Thiru Kalyana Mandapam is precarious, compromising the safety of pilgrims. Immediate structural repairs are warranted in this portion of the temple, replacing the cracked pillars and mending other damaged structural members:
5. Although the funds for the conservation work have been made available by different donors, the final say on the engineering method statements to be followed, materials to be used, measurements, and the verification of quality of execution must be under the control of HR&CE engineers. This does not seem to be the case.
6. The resolutions of the State Level Expert Committee's deliberations are to be treated only as recommendations, and are not in lieu of detailed specifications and engineering method statements to prepare the bill of quantities (BoQ) and cost estimates. This should be the case whether the work is executed departmentally (i.e., with government funds and HR&CE stapathis and identified contractors) or through donors (with independent stapathis and contractors). However, there appears to be no mechanism in place to verify conformity with the DPR and specifications in the executed works, making the entire process of DPR and BoQ preparation purely to the end of arriving at cost estimates to identify donors.
Page No.23 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
7. In addition, there seems to be no mechanism to check the skill and prerequisites of labour appointed to execute the work, particularly through donors.
8. Despite having had an external agency to prepare the DPR for conservation works, no drawings (site plan, detailed plans, elevations and sections) seem to have been developed for the project.
9. The identified issues with quality of execution and lacunae with the conservation works in historically-important temples under the purview of HR&CE are symptomatic of the absence of an in-house conservation wing at HR&CE. Such a wing is crucial for the establishment of good practices in conservation of historical living temples of Tamil Nadu and protection of the invaluable tangible and intangible religious heritage of Tamil Nadu. This point was time and again reiterated by the members of the Madras High Court appointed Interim Expert Committee in the W.P. 574 of 2015, of which one of the undersigned was the structural engineering expert. Unless the HR&CE Department makes a serious effort towards addressing this lacuna, outcomes of conservation work in remarkable temples such as the one at A/m. Kasi Viswanathar Temple in Tenkasi will never be the first, nor the last.”
20. After perusing the reports and photos, it is shocking to see that the damaged cement kalasam in the gopuram was not repaired and rectified before performing the Kumbabishekam. It is pertinent to state that the broken kalasam of Page No.24 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 gopuram which is obvious and explicit, which any layman can identify, it is not known how the respondents failed to notice and rectify the same. But without doing the conversation and repair work of kalasam of gopuram, the respondents had performed Kumbabishekam, which is totally against the concept of Kumbabishekam. This proves that the respondents have hurriedly performed the Kumbabishekam and the allegations put forth by the petitioners are true.
21. Further it is noticed that there is no bronze kalasam but only cement kalasam, that too is broken. It is pertinent to state that these pictures are taken after the completion of Kumbabishekam. Further, it is shocking to see that there are several cracks which have not been addressed at all. Furthermore, certain repairs are not being carried out in the way it ought to be carried. The IIT Professors report clearly states “but only patch repairs undertaken, the source of corrosion not identified, hence corrosion effects would be progressing if systematic corrosion repair was not undertaken.”
22. It is also seen that some of the stone inscriptions are erased either by painting or by applying cement paste on it. The report of the IIT officials and the Advocate Commissioner states “cement pointing is used in the masonry joints disfiguring the inscription”. This portion of the report is absolutely shocking. The Page No.25 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 supine attitude of the respondents in not preserving the ancient temples with the inscriptions ought to be deprecated. The inscriptions in the temple are the history with evidence. If such inscriptions are lost, then the history is lost and our precious culture is lost. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the allegations stated in the writ petitions against the respondents are absolutely true.
23. The renovation of temple is being carried out through willing donors. But the said donors are allowed to carry on the work by engaging their own people, who are not experts in carrying on the renovation work of the temples. Since experts are not involved in the repair and renovation works, the donors are using materials which are not permitted for the renovation of temples. The IIT Professors report also states that “the removal of accretionary infill walls was carried out with the use of heavy machinery, leading to structural damage in stone pillars and roof slab. The structural repairs adopted are unsympathetic to the historic nature of the stone mandapam”. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the donors ought to be allowed to carry on the work under the supervision of experts alone. Further the temple shall issue a list of do’s and don’ts to the donor, before allowing the donor to carry on the work. Page No.26 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
24. The contention of the respondent Executive Officer that, as and when the devotees have pointed out the defects, it would be carried out meticulously. After completion of the works, a fresh demand will be made by the devotees and the devotees were not allowing to conduct the Kumbabishekam. Such a contention of the Executive Officer of the temple clearly indicates that the Executive Officers have failed in their duty to do the repair and renovation work whereever it is needed but blaming the devotees, when such defects were pointed out by them. It is the responsibility of the Executive Officer to check and verify the defects, even before it was pointed out by the devotees and complete the works. The Executive Officer need not wait for the devotees to point out the defects. Infact, the report of IIT Professors states that the CUBE’s report which had pointed out the works to be carried out were not completed. Therefore, it is clear that the respondents' intention is only to conduct the Kumbabishekam for namesake and not to preserve the temple.
25. It is pertinent to state that the aforesaid report is submitted by the Advocate Commissioner and IIT Professors, after completion of Kumbabhishekam and the said report indicates that the some of the works are not completed, the completed work also is not adequate, the materials used are not the materials to be used for renovation of temples. Infact, when the then Executive Page No.27 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Officer, Murugan was carrying on the work of Kumbabhishekam, a report by the Assistant Commissioner of HR&CE states that the seepage work ought to undertaken and other list of works ought to be carried out. And now, after Kumbabhishekam, the present report states that the same seepage work was not addressed properly and the reason for such seepage was not addressed. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the renovation work was not carried out in certain places and in certain places the work is not adequate to address the issue.
26. It is seen observed that, not only the Kumbabishekam of the present temple is conducted in a hurried manner, but the same procedure is adopted across the temples in the entire Tamil Nadu. Infact, while the issue was brewing in the present temple, another Kumbabishekam was conducted in Arulmigu Mangalanatha Swamy Temple, Uthiragosamangai and the Court inspected the said temple. In the said temple also, all the works were not completed, but since the preparation of Kumbabhishekam was in a full-fledged manner, the same was conducted. It is pertinent to state that the HR&CE is fixing target to conduct Kumbabishekam per year. In turn, the temple is fixing the date of the Kumbabishekam. Thereafter, the Kumbabishekam works are started in a hurried manner to finish the works before the date of Kumbabishekam. It is because of Page No.28 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 this “Target Method”, the real purpose of Kumbabishekam is being lost. The above method is followed while conducting the Kumbabishekam in the present case also, which forms the reason for not even finishing the basic repair work of kalasam in the gopuram. The pictures submitted by the Expert body and the Advocate Commissioner are shocking and the said pictures are given below: Page No.29 of 37
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
27. It is pertinent to state that HR&CE is functioning like corporate company by fixing target to conduct Kumbabishekam. The HR&CE ought to realise that it is protecting the temples, antiquities, culture of our society. In such circumstances, there cannot be any corporate culture while carry out the work of renovation and kumbabishekam. The observation of the IIT Professors in their report that “unless the HR&CE Department makes a serious effort towards addressing this lacuna, outcomes of conservation work in remarkable temples such as the one at Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathar Temple in Tenkasi will never be the first, nor the last” is absolutely true.
Page No.30 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
28. The contention of the learned Additional Advocate General is that all vital repairs are carried out and if there are any small repairs or any other works are to be carried out in order to conserve the temple, the same would be carried out after Kumbabhishekam. Such an argument clearly indicates the respondents have not understood the concept of Kumbabhishekam. The respondents are under the impression that temple is a building and whenever the temple needs to carry some repair work, the same may be carried out. But it is absolutely incorrect. The temple is considered the abode of the deities shrined in the temple. The temple is also considered as the physical body of the main deity. Hence, there are procedures to carry out any repair works and the same cannot be carried out as and when the repair is needed and as per the whims and fancies of the respondents.
29. As far as Kumbabhishekam is concerned, it is conducted once in 12 years, which means any damages to the temple’s physical structures can be repaired once in 12 years. The Balalayam announcement is the indication that the repair works would be carried out to rectify the damages. Thereafter, all the repairs works ought to be carried out, without leaving out any repair work, only after which the Kumbabhishekam can be conducted.
Page No.31 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
30. Now comes the crucial question of who has to certify whether all the repair works are carried out properly and when can the Kumbabhishekam for a Temple be performed by fixing a date. It is seen that the High Court had passed a detail order in W.P.No.574 of 2015 wherein it is stated that the Committee consisting of the following members shall carry out the repair and renovation work of the temples:
1.Structural Engineering Expert
2. Archaeological Expert
3. Conservation Expert
4. Traditional Stapathi
5. Two Agama Experts
31. It is seen in the present case that the earlier report states that the “Centre for Urbanisation, Buildings and Environment (CUBE), IIT Madras” was engaged by HR&CE for distress mapping and detailed project report of the temple and such report was submitted in December 2022, wherein the report suggested regarding the distress portions and the subsequent repair works ought to be carried out for the rectification of the same. If so, then the same CUBE ought to verify whether the said distresses are rectified and issue a certificate of fitness. Thereafter, the State Expert Committee consisting of Structural Engineering Page No.32 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Expert, Archaeological Expert, Conservation Expert, Traditional Stapathi and Two Agama Experts ought to have issued certificate of completion and then only, the Kumbabhishekam date ought to be fixed.
32. For the reasons stated supra, the following guidelines are issued:
i. The practice of pre-fixing the date of Kumbabishekam shall be stopped forthwith;
ii. Before starting the renovation work, the temple shall obtain a report of distress mapping and detailed project report from the Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras. After completion of work of distress as stated in the reports, the certificate of fitness shall be obtained from the Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras iii. Then the temple shall obtain the certificate of completion from the State Expert Committee consisting of body of Structural Engineering Expert, Archaeological Expert, Conservation Expert, Traditional Stapathi and Two Agama Experts, as per the directions issued in W.P.No.574 of 2015 of this Court; After which, the date of Kumbabishekam shall be fixed and conducted. Page No.33 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 iv. The donor’s work shall be taken but the said donor ought to carry on the work under the supervision of the State Expert Committee alone or before the team deputed by such Committee.
v. While carrying out such renovation works in the Temple, heavy machineries shall not be used. The materials and chemicals permitted by the Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, alone shall be used;
vi. The above directions shall be followed while doing repair, renovation work and kumbabhishekam of all temples in Tamil Nadu;
vii. In the present case, the IIT Professors have given the remarks and recommendations and the same shall be carried out and completed without any further delay. After completing the renovation works, the temple is directed to obtain the certificate of fitness from Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras and the certificate of completion from State Expert Committee and display the same in the temple. Only upon completion of the above two procedures, kumbabhishekam shall be conducted.
Page No.34 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
33. With the above said observations, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[J.N.B., J.] [S.S.Y., J.]
24.06.2025
Index : Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
Tmg/sts
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai.
2.Additional Commissioner (Thirupani), The State Level Expert Committee, Office of the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Chennai.
3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Thoothukudi.
4.The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
5.Assistant Commissioner (In-charge), Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
Page No.35 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025
6.Additional Commissioner, State Level Expert Committee, Office of the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Thoothukudi.
Page No.36 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm ) W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 J.NISHA BANU, J.
and S.SRIMATHY, J.
Tmg/sts Pre-Delivery of Common Order made in W.P.(MD)Nos.5596 and 8990 of 2025 Dated:
24.06.2025 Page No.37 of 37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/07/2025 05:30:05 pm )