Madras High Court
K.P.Selvaraj vs The Commissioner on 17 February, 2025
Author: M.S. Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 28.1.2025
Pronounced on : 17.2.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE
W.P.(MD) No. 1697 of 2025
K.P.Selvaraj,
S/o. Peramaiya,
No.362, Melatheru,
Naduvikottai,
Thanjavur District -614 602. …Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2. The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department,
No.1/304-4, Rajaji Road,
Thanjavur District – 614 602.
3. The Executive Officer,
Arulmigu Nadiamman Temple,
Pattukottai, Thanjavur District.
4. The District Collector,
Thanjavur District,
Thanjavur.
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm )
5. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Pattukottai,
Thanjavur District. …Respondents
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.1697 of 2025
To issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of a Writ of
Mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to print the name as
Adi Dravidar instead of "Oorar" in the Pattukottai Arulmigu
Nadiamman Temple festival invitation, considering the peace
committee resolution dated 27.03.2009 on the file of the 5"
Respondent and Petitioner's representation dated 06.11.2024.
Appearance of Parties:
For Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu Rajadurai, SC
For M/s. I.Robert Chandrakumar,
K.Dileeban, M.Venkatesh and
K.S.Gukanesan, Advocates.
For R1, R2, R4 and R5 : Mr.Thilak Kumar, Govt. Pleader
For R3 : Mr.V.Chandraseka, Advocate
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by Dr.A.D.Maria Clete. J) Heard.
2. The petitioner serves as the President of the Naduvikottai 2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Adidravidar Welfare Sangam. He has filed this writ petition in the interest of the public, claiming that he has no personal stake in the litigation. According to the petitioner, the Pattukkottai Arulmigu Nadiamman Temple was founded by members or various communities, and an annual festival is held at the temple during the Tamil month of Panguni. This festival customarily takes place on the third Tuesday of Panguni. This festival customarily takes place on the third Tuesday of Panguni, which typically falls within the first two weeks of April each year.
3. It was submitted that the temple festival is conducted by the Executive Officer of the temple (3rd Respondent) who is the officer under the 1st Respondent HR & CE Dept. Even donations for the festival must be routed through the 3rd Respondent. The festival is called as Arulmigu Nadiambal Perunthiruvizha, The invitation for the 14 days festival is prepared by the 3rd Respondent and sent to all concerned. For this year's Perunthiruvizha (festival), starting from 2.4.2024 and ending on 13.4.2024 the invitation was printed under the supervision and direction of the 3rd Respondent. A copy of the invitation was enclosed in the typed set fled by the Petitioner. 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm )
4. In this year's invitation, the schedule of festivities for each day, along with the names of individuals or groups sponsoring the Mandagappadi, has been listed date-wise as follows:
Date Sponsorship by 2.4.2024 Villagers, Rajus, Naidu vagayara 3.4.2024 Kandiyan Street Kallars 4.4.2024 Munsif Court 5.4.2024 Mr.Vaduganathan Chettiar Vagayara Mr.T.Magitharan (Chinnaiah vagayara) 6.4.2024 Revenue Department officials, Pattukkottai 7.4.2024 Mr.R.Nagarajan Chettiar & Sons, Pattarai Mandagappaditharargal Varthaga Sangam, Pattukkottai 8.4.2024 Maharajesri Gatkerao Saheb 9.4.2024 T.N.Village Administrative Officeres Sangam, Pattukottai Taluk 10.4.2024 Temple Project 11.4.2024 Temple Project 12.4.2024 Temple Project 13.4.2024 Temple project Highways dept.
officers and contractors, Pattukkottai
5. The petitioner contended that while listing the various sponsors (Mandagappaditharars) for different days of the festival, the 3rd Respondent had included the names of the respective 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) communities of the sponsors in the invitation. However, notably, the name of the Adidravidar community was omitted. Instead, it was vaguely suggested that the term "Oorar" (i.e., villagers) would encompass the Adidravidar community.
6. It was further submitted that in 2009. a dispute arose during the Perunthiruvizha (temple festival) regarding the printing of the invitation, specifically concerning the omission of the Adidravidar community's name. In response to these objections, a peace committee meeting was convened by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pattukkottai (5th Respondent), on 27.03.2009. The meeting was attended by representatives of various communities, the temple trustees, the Tahsildar of Pattukkottai, and the Inspector of Police, Pattukkottai.
7. The Kandian Street Kallars objected to the invitation referring to the first day's festival as Mandagappadi, stating that only their Mandagappadi should mark the commencement of the festival. This stance was endorsed by the 3rd Respondent. However, on behalf of the residents of the western end of the village, it was contended that the invitation should explicitly 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) include the name "Adidravidar" alongside other communities such as Rajus and Naidus for the first day's events. They argued that it was unjustified to refer to all others merely as Oorar and claim that the term inherently included the Adidravidar community. They further demanded that the invitation be printed accordingly to reflect this inclusion.
8. In that meeting, the 5th Respondent, the Revenue Divisional Oficer (RDO), informed the participants that the demands would be forwarded to the Commissioner, HR & CE (R1), and the District Collector (R4). Further action would be taken upon obtaining their approval. The agreement reached among all concerned parties was also reported in the newspaper, and a press clipping of the same was enclosed in the typed set of documents.
9. However, contrary to the decision taken in the meeting, similar invitations were once again printed without incorporating the requested changes. As a result, the petitioner was compelled to submit a representation dated 06.11.2024 to the 1st , 2nd , 4th and 5th 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Respondents. In the absence of any response, the present writ petition was filed.
10. Upon notice being issued by this Court, the Respondents entered an appearance through their respective counsels. On behalf of the 3 Respondent, a counter-affidavit dated 02.01.2025 was filed. In the counter, the 3rd Respondent contested the petition by arguing that the petitioner was attempting to enforce the neace committee minutes dated 27.03.2009 after a lapse of 15 years. It was further contended that the said minutes did not record any binding decision that could be enforced by the petitioner.
11. The 3rd Respondent further stated that the region comprises several Palayams (hamlets) in Pattukkottai, including Rajapalayam, Melapalayam, and Keelapalayam, where the majority of residents belong to the Raju and Naidu Communities. It was asserted that these communities settled in the area during the Nayak rule and formed a distinct clan or family group, traditionally sponsoring the first day's festival. Consequently, the term "Oorar" (Villagers) was used in the invitation because these 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Palayams were historically under their control. It was also Contended that on the first day of the festival, all communities, including the Adidravidar community, participate in the worship by arriving at the temple in groups.
12. Strangely, despite being a Government Officer under the 3rd Respondent Department, the 3rd Respondent, in his counter- affidavit, went further to elaborate on the actual meaning of the term "Oorar" as used in the invitation. In paragraph 3 of the counter-affidavit, he made the following assertion:
"Oorar representing all the peoples in the village and Rajus and Naidus are sponsoring the 1st day festival. No other community people has sponsored the 1st day festival. Oorar is a common name representing the people in the village and Rajus and Naidus are printed simply because of the fact that they only sponsored the 1st day festival. Therefore there is no discrimination or sidelining of any community and as such the writ petition deserves dismissal at the threshold."
13. The 3rd Respondent further submitted that over the past 15 years, neither the petitioner nor the Adidravidar community 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) had raised any objections regarding this issue. He alleged that the petitioner had filed the present writ petition in his personal capacity rather than on behalf of the community. The term "Oorar" does not denote the Adidravidar community. If the petitioner's request were to be accepted, other communities might also come forward with similar requests. He further stated that the petitioner had not produced any documents to establish that the Adidravidar community had ever sponsored the first-day festival. The representatives of the Raju and Naidu communities had traditionally sponsored the first-day festival on behalf of all villagers (Oorar), and hence, their community names were included in the invitation.
14. The 3rd Respondent also submitted copies of Perunthiruvizha festival invitations dating back to 2006 to demonstrate that the first-day festival has consistently been sponsored by the Raju and Naidu communities. He contended that the invitations printed in previous years were similar to the current one, reinforcing the longstanding practice. The 3rd Respondent also produced donation receipts from 2006 onward to show that the Raju and Naidu communities had financially contributed to the 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Mandagappadi conducted by the Oorars. These receipts, issued in their names, were presented as evidence to support the claim that the sponsorship had always been attributed to them. Based on these submissions, the 3rd Respondent sought the rejection of the petitioner's case.
15. When the matter came up for hearing before this Court, it was informed that the Perunthiruvizha festival for the year 2025 was scheduled to commence in the Tamil month of Panguni (falling within the first two weeks of April). The petitioner, therefore, requested the Court to issue appropriate directions to the authorities to ensure equality and social justice in the conduct of temple festivals. behalf of the 1 and 2nd Respondents, no instructions were given concern1ng tne decision taken by them on the representation sent by the Petitioner as early as 6.11.2024.
16. This Court is not inclined to dismiss the writ petition based on the contentions advanced by the 3rd Respondent. The Court is not persuaded by the argument that the term “Oorar" in the invitation has always meant that, since the Raju and Naidu communities contributed funds, their names were explicitly 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) printed while "Oorar" was intended to represent all villagers collectively. Further, the contention that directing the inclusion of the Adidravidar community's name in the invitation for the first- day Mandagappadi would lead to similar demands from other communities is untenable. Such an argument does not hold any rational basis and is therefore outrightly rejected.
17. In this context, it is imperative to recall the writings of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Addressing the question of whether an "untouchable" (a member of the Scheduled Caste) could be considered an integral part of Hindu society, he Wrote:
"The whole tradition of the Hindus is to recognize the Untouchables as a separate element and insist upon it as a fact. The traditional terminology of the Hindus to distinguish Hindus and Untouchables furnishes the best evidence in favour of the contention of the Untouchables. According to this traditional terminology, Hindus are called Savarnas and the Untouchables are called Avarnas. It speaks of the Hindus as Chaturvarnikas and of the Untouchables as Panchamas. Such a terminology could not have come into existence if separation had not become so prominent and its observance so necessary as to require coining of special terms to give expression to the fact." (Freedom from the Governing Class- Dr.Ambedkar's selected writings) 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm )
18. In his renowned lecture, Annihilation of Caste which was never allowed to be delivered but later published under the title, Annihilation of Caste", Dr. B.R. Ambedkar made a profound observation. He emphasized that the destruction of caste does not imply the demolition of a physical barrier but rather signifies a fundamental shift in perception and social consciousness. He wrote:
"Why is it that a large majority of Hindus do not inter- dine and do not inter-marry? Why is it that your cause is not popular? There can be only one answer to this question and it is that inter-dining and inter-marriage are repugnant to the beliefs and dogmas which the Hindus regard as sacred. Caste is not a physical object like a wall of bricks or a line of barbed wire which prevents the Hindus from co-mingling, and which has, therefore, to be pulled down...The destruction of caste does not therefore mean the destruction of a physical barrier. It means a notional change."
(Annihilation of Caste, in Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches)
19. On the issue of temple entry for Scheduled Cast individuals, a movement initiated by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, he articulated its necessity as follows:
12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) "Today, we are about to enter the temple. But the entry in the temple would not solve the whole problem. Our problem is comprehensive. It is political, social, religious, economic, educational etc. The issue of Kala Ram Temple entry is a appeal to the Hindu mind. The high caste Hindus deprived us from the far ages. Whether the same hindus are willing to grant our humanitarian rights will be the question raised from this temple entry satyagraha. Whether the hindu mind is willing to accept us as human beings, this is the question to be tested through this Satyagraha. The high caste hindus looked down upon us and treated us even worse than cats and dogs. We wish to know whether those very hindus would give us the status of man or not. This Satyagraha will provide answer to this question. This Satyagraha is one of the efforts for bringing about a change of heart among the high caste hindus. Hence the success of this effort depends on the Hindu mind-set."
(Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, Vol.17 (1982) p.
181)
20. In the Kandadevi Temple (Devakottai), when Scheduled Caste individuals were barred from even pulling the temple car rope during the festival, the matter was brought before this Court. A Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Markandeya Katju, in its 13 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) judgment in Puthiya Tamilagam, represented by its President Dr. K. Krishnaswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu & Others, reported in 2005 (3) Law Weekly 140, issued the following directions:
"10. This Court will no longer tolerate such kinds of treatment of the S. CS.T Communities as they also are equal citizens of our country and are hence entitled to a life of dignity in view ofArticle 21 of the Constitution of India, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of India. In our opinion, to deny them the right to participate in the pulling of the Temple Car is violation of Article
21 of the Constitution, apart from being violative of the orders of the Court dated 6.7.1998 and of the Comnmissioner dated 26.6.1999, and it will simply not be tolerated by this Court. 6.6.1999, and it will simply not be tolerated by this Court. Oppression, atrocities, and humiliation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is a shameful chapter in our country's history. For thousands of years the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in our country have been humiliated, insulted and looked down upon. In fact, even today the so-called upper castes and even 0.B.Cs often look down and insult the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This can no longer be tolerated in this modern age of democracy. In the modern age, equality is one of the basic features which characterises this era. Today no people and no community will tolerate being treated as inferior and will oppose such ill treatment, and will be justified in doing so. The truth is that even today, in many parts of our country Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are oppressed and humiliated and violence is committed on them” ......
14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm )
13. It is alleged that some representatives of the Nattar community claim that there is a custom that members belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities have no right to pull the temple car. Although this contention is denied, yet even assuming that there is such a custom, it will be wholly illegal and unconstitutional, as it is against the right to a life of dignity envisaged in Article 21 of the Constitution. After the promulgation of the Constitution, all customs which are in violation ofArticles 14, 2l and other constitutional provisions are null and void, and have to be disregarded, since the Constitution is the fundamental law of the land.
14. We make it clear that the District Collector cum District Magistrate will be personally held responsible if the order we are passing today is not complied with. The District Collector cum District Magistrate must act fairly to all castes and communities and ensure that everyone is given equal respect in this Car Festival and even otherwise. The District Collector cum District Magistrate will submit a report to this Court about the conducting of the Car Festival and as to whether our orders have been complied with in letter and spirit. This Court will continue monitoring the matter even in future."
21. In a similar case concerning a temple festival in Thoppunayagam village, located in Orathanadu Taluk (adjacent to Pattukkottai Taluk, where the present dispute has arisen), a distinguished Judge of this Court found that a law and order issue had emerged due to the participation of Dalits in the festival. Consequently, the Tahsildar had halted the celebrations. In S. 15 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Rajendran v Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thanjavur & Others, W.P. (MD) No. 7205 of 2008, dated 07.08.2008, the Court made the following observations:
"...this Court is pained to record that situations like the present one are being continued even altar the dawn of 2lst century. Even at the time of The dominant community in the village is not willing to accommodate the dalit brethren of the same village even at the altar of the God.” He also quoted a short verse in Tamil, which, when translated, reads as follows:
"We go against the saying let s unite and pull the chariot together And say let 's push our brethren To the edge of the village These people are indeed strange!"
22. This Court once again addressed a case in which villagers attempted to prevent the chariot procession from passing through the Scheduled Caste colony in Poottai village, Villupuram District. The Court directed the district authorities to ensure that the chariot procession proceeded through the Dalit colony. In Arulmighu Poottai Mariamman Temple v. Revenue Divisional Officer-Cum Executive Magistrate,, reported in 2010 (4) MLJ (Mad) 1077, the Court made the following observations:
"22. ...there is no scope for the Trustees to assert a right of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) taking the temple car through a particular route thereby denying the right of the colony dalits from worshipping the deity in the colony itself..
…
26. ....the attempt by the Trustees to prevent the Dalits from taking the temple car to the Colony during the Temple Car festival held during the month of Aadi cannot be accepted by this Court. Any such order in their favour will amount to perpetuating untouchability which has been specifically prohibited by Article 17 of the Constitution of India. The temple Trustees have failed to establish any custom or usage in charting the route for the deity to be taken in the temple Car. For the last three years due to their intransigence and caste supremacy, the festival has been stopped. It is not as if there is no place in the colony by which the deity can reach the dalit, but there is place in the heart of the caste Hindus of the village to accept the dalits as Their brethren so as to have a whole community worship. In such circumstances, the Government cannot be a spectator in denying the rights of the dalits of the colony and the constitutional mandate will have to be enforced through all legal means.
23. The socio-religious practices around such festivals have traditionally excluded the Dalit communities from active participation, except for assigning them specific services during 17 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) the festival. There is no gainsaying that festival tasks are be carried out based on caste: Cleaning the temple premises where the festival takes place and the paths used for the deity's procession, erecting pandals, and skinning sacrificed goats are the duties of the Pallars. Clearing the waste collected by the Pallars, as well as drumming during festival times, is the duty of the Paraiyars. Shaving the heads of those who wish to do so during festivals is the duty of the Ambattars.
24. The prayer of the respondent seeks to acknowledge the participation of the Dalit community in both word and action and to publicly recognize their inclusion through the notice. The exclusion of the Adidravidar community from the invitation, under the pretext that the term "Oorar" (i.e., Villagers) includes them, is being contested in this writ petition.
25. A fundamental contradiction in the festival invitations is that while dominant castes are explicitly identified and given visibility, Dalits are subsumed under the generic term 'Oorar,' not just generically included but effectively excluded from specific recognition. This selective visibility reinforces systemic inequality 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) by ensuring that dominant castes are acknowledged while Dalits remain unseen, denying them both social value privacy that promotes social good, common good and collective good and a meaningful participation in society. The failure to explicitly recognize Dalits forces them into a dilemma- either accept invisibility or assert their caste identity to gain acknowledgment. True inclusivity must reconcile this contradiction by ensuring that Dalits have the right to be recognized without being compelled to declare their caste identity, thus balancing their dignity, privacy, and equitable participation in public religious affairs.
26. On the issue of untouchability and discriminatory practices in this country, the Supreme Court, in its recent judgment in Sukanya Shantha v Union of India & Others, reported in 2024 10 S.C.R. 493 : 2024 INSC 753, made the following observations in paragraph 87 :
"87. The history of India has witnessed centuries of discrimination towards the oppressed castes.
Violence, discrimination, oppression, hatred,
contempt, and humiliation, towards these
communities were the norm. The caste system entrenched these social injustices deeply within 19 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) society, creating an environment where the principles of natural justice were blatantly disregarded. In this hierarchical system, neutrality was virtually non-existent, and there was an inherent and pervasive bias against those belonging to the oppressed castes. This bias manifested in numerous ways, including exclusion from social, economic, and political opportunities. The caste system ensured that the oppressed castes remained marginalized and deprived of their basic rights and dignity.
27. Even earlier, the Supreme Court, in its judgment in Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, reported in 2019 (11) SCC 1, held that Article 17 was enshrined as a fundamental right to uphold the constitutional mandate of equality. The Court observed as follows:
"Article l7 is the constitutional promise of equality and justice to those who have remained at the lowest rung of a traditional belief system founded in graded inequality. Article 17 is enforceable against everyone - the State, groups, individuals, legal persons, entities and organised religion - and embodies an enforceable constitutional mandate. It has been placed on a constitutional pedestal of enforceable fundamental rights, beyond being only 20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) a directive principle, for two reasons.
First, "untouchability" is violative of the basic rights of socially backward individuals and their dignity. Second, the framers believed that the abolition of "untouchability'" is a constitutional imperative to establish an equal social order: Its presence together and an equal footing with other fundamental rights, was designed to "give vulnerable people the power to achieve collective good". Article 17 is a reflection of the transformative ideal of the Constitution, which gives expression to the aspirations of socially disempowered individuals and communities, and provides a moral framework for radical social transformation."
28.The Supreme Court has mandated that when confronted with practices of caste-based discrimination, the Court must adopt an active and interventionist approach. This principle was reiterated in its decision in Sukanya Shantha v Union of India (cited supra). In paragraph 23, the Court observed as follows:
"The Constitution thus stands as a testament to the fight against historical injustices and for the establishment of an egalitarian social order: It 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) aims to prevent caste-based discrimination. This commitment is not limited to preventing discriminatory actions by the State alone. lt extends to the actions of citizens and private entities as well. It empowers the State to enact appropriate legislation or take executive measures to tackle caste-based discrimination. At the same time, it mandates the decision-makers to take every step to end discrimination in Indian society, The pervasive influence of caste necessitates continuous efforts to ensure equality and justice for all citizens. The manifestations of caste are too numerous to exhaustively enumerate. 38 They can manifest in various forms and across different sectors of society, from education and employment to social interactions and access to resources. As has been observed "Continued to be attributed typically to the rural hinterlands and assumed to be limited only to the discussions on reservation policy and electoral politics, caste has mutated and diversified during the past three decades. Today its presence is visible in urban housing, its markets and businesses, higher educational institutions, and public sector offices as well as the private sector working spaces, which were projected to be secular and privilege class over caste, and the 22 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) various socio-economic and political institutions that interface with everyday lived experiences "
The fight against caste-based discrimination is not a battle that can be won overnight; it requires sustained effort, dedication, and the willingness to confront and challenge societal norms that perpetuate inequality. When faced with practices of caste-based discrimination, this Court must take an active stand. In entertaining the current petition, this Court is making its contribution to the ongoing struggle to dismantle caste discrimination.
29. Thus, we have no hesitation in granting relief to the grievance raised by the petitioner. The question, however, is the nature of the relief to be granted. From the pleadings, it is evident that while every major caste in the village is explicitly represented in the Mandagappadi on different days along with salaried employees from various government departments who likely collect public contributions for the event -the Scheduled Caste community alone has been conspicuously excluded. The respondents may argue that there is no restriction on Scheduled Caste individuals worshipping the deity or participating in the festival. However, we are not inclined to accept such a claim without scepticism. Participation must be meaningful and 23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) substantive, not merely symbolic or tokenistic.
30. At the same time, merely directing the inclusion of the Adidravidar community's name in place of the term "Oorar" on the first day of the festival 19 discrimination" may not necessarily lead to meaningful participation by Scheduled Caste individuals. The core issue is not just nomenclature but ensuring their substantive inclusion in the festival proceedings. The 3rd Respondent has argued that other communities residing in the area may also come forward with similar demands, implying that he represents their interests. However, as evident from the peace committee meeting held in 2009, it is specifically the Scheduled Caste community that has consistently raised grievances about their exclusion from the invitation. This longstanding concern cannot be dismissed as a mere request for symbolic representation but must be addressed to ensure genuine participation and equality in the festival.
31. We are of the considered opinion that temple festivals should be inclusive and celebrated by all people belonging to the Hindu religion, which, by definition, includes Scheduled Caste 24 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) individuals as well. The practice of listing specific caste names in the temple invitation solely on the basis of financial contributions is unwarranted, especially when the exclusion of Scheduled Caste individuals is justified on the ground that they have not made monetary contributions. It is unnecessary to name either donors or sponsors in the invitation for the Perunthiruvizha (the festival conducted during the Tamil month of Panguni) at the Amman temple. Therefore, from the forthcoming years, the 3rd Respondent, the Executive Officer of the temple, shall prepare the invitation that includes details of the various festival events but exclude printing the names of different caste and communities on the invitation. If needed, the temple administration may send individual acknowledgments to donors in appreciation of their contributions. However, the invitation must state that the events are collectively sponsored by all the people of Pattukkottai, without any special mention of caste identities.
32. We further direct Respondents 1, 2, 4, and 5 to ensure strict compliance with this order and to issue appropriate directions to the 3rd Respondent so that the Perunthirvizha ofArulmigu Nadiamman Thirukkoil, Pattukkottai, scheduled to be 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) celebrated from the Tamil month of Panguni (April 2025), is conducted in accordance with the directions set forth above. It is made clear that in the event of any disturbance or law and order issue, the 4th Respondent, the District Collector, and the 5th Respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), shall take appropriate measures to ensure the smooth conduct of the festival. Accordingly, WP. (MD) No. 1697 of 2025 is ordered on the above terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S.R., J.) (A.D.M.C., J) 17.02.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No av 26 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Copy to:
1. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.
2. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.1/304-4, Rajaji Road, Thanjavur District – 614 602.
3. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Nadiamman Temple, Pattukottai, Thanjavur District.
4. The District Collector, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.
5. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pattukottai, Thanjavur District.27
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm ) Mr.JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH, J.
AND DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
av Pre-delivery Judgment in W.P.(MD).No. 1697 of 2025 17.02.2025 28 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/05/2025 01:09:08 pm )