Adithayan v. Travancore Devaswom Board , 2002, it was challenged if non-Brahmins can be appointed as a pujari in a temple. The Supreme Court held ... that the Brahmins do not have the monopoly over-performing puja in a temple. The court also added that non-Brahmins can be appointed
caste system lies not in upholding the supremacy of the Brahmin, but in conditioning the consciousness of the lower castes in accepting their inferior status ... elaborate, complex and subtle scheme of scripture, mythology and ritual that Brahminism succeeded in investing the caste system with a moral authority that has been
Constitution of India
India
Constitution of India
CONTITUENTASSEMBLY 00 of 1950
Published in Gazette 00
Cochin Nambudri Act (XVII of 1113); or the Travancore Malayala Brahmin Act with respect to the matters for which provision is made in this
every 14 seats, 6 were to
be allotted to Non-Brahmin (Hindus), 2 to Backward Hindus, 2
to Brahmins, 2 to Harijans. 1 to Anglo ... committee, candidates used to be selected strictly
on the following basis:--
Non-Brahmin (Hindus) ... 6
Backward Hindus ... 2
Brahmins ... 2
Harijans ... 2
Anglo-Indians
CITATION:
1965 AIR 1970 1965 SCR (3) 122
ACT:
Hindu Law--Married Brahmin woman becoming concubine of
Sudra male-having children--Their rights of
maintenance ... Hindu
Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 .
HEADNOTE:
The first respondent S, a Brahmin woman married to R,
during the lifetime of her husband became
supra) may now be
noticed. The challenge therein was by a Namboodri Brahmin to the
appointment of a non-Namboodri Brahmin who was otherwise well ... usage in the temple that its priests are appointed exclusively from
Namboodri Brahmins and any departure therefrom is in violation of the
rights of Namboodri
first Head who was a direct disciple of Sri Madhavacharya. Shivalli Brahmins who are the followers of Sri Madhavacharya claim this as their exclusive Mutt ... These Brahmins are Tulu speaking Brahmins of the Smartha sect and are followers of Dwaita philosophy founded by Sri Madvacharya. The headquarters of these Brahmins
Maharaja Of Kolhapur vs S. Sundaram Ayyar And 15 Ors. on 21 January, 1924
Equivalent
whether the appointment of a person, who is not a Malayala Brahmin,
as "Santhikaran" or Poojari (Priest) of the Temple in question
Kongorpilly ... raised in this appeal. The appellant claims himself to be a Malayala
Brahmin by community and a worshipper of the Siva Temple in
question
