Supreme Court Stays Madras High Court Order Handing Chidambaram Nataraja Temple To Management Board

The Supreme Court has stayed the Madras High Court's direction constituting a five-member Board of Management to take over the administration of the Chidambaram Nataraja Temple from the Podhu Dikshitars, who have invoked their constitutional right to manage the temple's affairs under Article 26.

Court has stayed the October 30 judgment of the Madras High Court and issued notice on the appeals filed by the Podhu Dikshitars. A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M. Pancholi passed the interim order after hearing the parties.

"Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, we are of the considered view that the impugned judgment deserves to be stayed. Accordingly, it stands stayed," the Bench ordered.

The dispute originated from a Tamil Nadu Government Order dated May 17, 2022 (G.O. Ms. No. 115), which permitted devotees to climb the Kanagasabai Mandapam, a raised platform inside the temple, to have darshan of Lord Nataraja.

The Podhu Dikshitars challenged the government order before the Madras High Court, contending that it interfered with their constitutional right under Article 26 to manage the religious affairs of the temple.

On October 30, a Division Bench of Justices G. Jayachandran and E. Manoharan upheld the government's decision, holding that permitting devotees to have darshan from the Kanagasabai would not interfere with the performance of customary religious ceremonies. However, the High Court went beyond the issue of devotees' access to the platform and examined the overall administration of the temple.

The Bench expressed concerns over alleged damage to the temple's heritage structures, unauthorised constructions, maintenance of temple properties and the accounting of its income and expenditure. It observed that the temple's movable and immovable properties had not been properly accounted for and that its financial records required closer scrutiny.

High Court also referred to alterations allegedly made to the ancient temple structures, including damage to sculptures and murals in the name of renovation and maintenance. It further expressed concerns over the use of temple premises for non-religious and commercial activities and indicated that a forensic audit of the temple's accounts was necessary.

In view of these findings, the Madras High Court constituted a five-member Board of Management comprising: Justice V. Bharathidasan (Retd.) as Chairman, Justice R. Suresh Kumar (Retd.) as Co-Chairman. C. Rajendran, IAS (Retd.), as Member, Secretary of the Podhu Dikshitars as an ex-officio member and Secretary to the Tamil Nadu Government's Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department as an ex-officio member.

The Board was directed to take over the temple's administration "till the ill is cured". It was entrusted with overseeing the temple's finances, maintaining proper accounts, recovering encroached properties, collecting outstanding rental dues and ensuring the preservation of its heritage structures.

The Board was also directed to ensure that devotees received fair and equal opportunities to have darshan from the Kanagasabai, in consultation with the Podhu Dikshitars. Importantly, the High Court clarified that the daily rituals and periodic festivals would continue to remain within the exclusive prerogative of the Podhu Dikshitars, subject to established customs and practices.

Challenging the High Court's judgment, the Podhu Dikshitars approached the Supreme Court contending that the High Court had exceeded the scope of the original dispute. Senior Advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the proceedings before the High Court primarily concerned the government order permitting devotees to access the Kanagasabai.

He submitted that the High Court could not have converted proceedings concerning devotees' access into an exercise for transferring the temple's administration to a separate Board of Management. The petitioners also relied on the Supreme Court's 2014 judgment in Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. State of Tamil Nadu, arguing that the rights of the Podhu Dikshitars to administer the temple had already been recognised by the Supreme Court.

Vaidyanathan also disputed the allegations that the Dikshitars were responsible for alterations to the temple structures and submitted that audited accounts had been furnished.

Senior Advocates Guru Krishnakumar, K. Parameshwar, J. Sai Deepak and Pinky Anand also appeared for the petitioners.

Opposing the challenge, the Tamil Nadu Government relied on a report of the Heritage Commission, which had documented alleged alterations to the temple structures, including changes to a passage leading to the Nataraja shrine. The State also raised concerns regarding the temple's financial accounts and administration.

Senior Advocates Jaideep Gupta and Shekhar Naphade appeared for the State.

Case Title: Sabhanayakar Temple vs. State of TN