Community Temple Receives Public Donations? Govt Can Probe Misuse, Says Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that the State is empowered to step in and examine allegations of mismanagement in temples that receive public donations, even if they are traditionally or community-managed.

A division bench of Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice P. Dhanabal said that once a temple functions on public contributions and is used as a place of worship by the entire village, it assumes the character of a public religious institution under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Act.

Court was dealing with a writ appeal filed by one party to a long-standing dispute over the administration of Arulmigu Vembiamman Temple in Villupuram district. The writ court had earlier restrained the appellant from interfering in temple affairs and had permitted the petitioner to continue managing the shrine for the time being, subject to examination by HR&CE authorities. The appellant argued that the writ court exceeded the prayers of the original petition, but the bench rejected this, holding that a constitutional court may mould relief in the interest of justice.

The division bench noted that the temple stands on grama-natham land, which is common village land, and that all villagers regularly worship and financially contribute to poojas, festivals and functions.

On these admitted facts, the bench concluded that the shrine satisfies the statutory definition of a “temple” under Section 6(20) of the HR&CE Act because it is used as a place of public religious worship and supported by public funds.

Court clarified that where public contributions are involved, the State has a legitimate interest in preventing maladministration or misappropriation of temple assets.

The HR&CE Department, it said, may conduct inspections and initiate necessary action if irregularities arise. At the same time, the department cannot interfere in religious practices or the performance of poojas, which must continue in line with local customs.

The bench also recorded that the writ petitioner had filed an application under Section 63(b) of the Act before the Joint Commissioner. Court, therefore, directed the Joint Commissioner to decide the matter on merits after hearing all parties.

Court added that the pendency of the application did not bar the HR&CE Department from acting to maintain peace and protect temple property.

As the dispute over trusteeship was essentially private, court clarified that the parties may approach a civil court for determination of their rights. It left untouched the writ court’s earlier directions, including the bar on interference with temple management and the prohibition on installing loudspeakers or using the premises for non-religious purposes.

Disposing of the appeal, the bench emphasised that public order and proper administration in a temple used by an entire village community must be safeguarded, and State oversight is justified where public contributions flow into temple activities.

"If public contributions are involved, State can intervene in case of maladministration or misappropriation of funds, following the procedure as outlined in the Act and Rules, and take necessary actions. Right to administer the temple would not include maladministration," the bench said. 

Case Title: R.Thirumurugan vs. R.Thennarasu and Others

Order Date: November 21, 2025

Bench: Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice P. Dhanabal