‘Temple Promotes Mental Well-Being’: Madras High Court Refuses Removal from Park Land
Madras High Court rules that a decades-old temple within a designated park area cannot be treated as encroachment, citing public use and community support.
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a writ petition seeking removal of a temple allegedly constructed on land earmarked as a park and playground in a residential layout in Tiruvallur district, holding that the structure could not be treated as an encroachment and formed part of the public space.
"The construction of the temple and worship of Deity is also a way for relaxation, which promotes the mental well-being of majority of residents of the subject layout. Therefore, at any cost, the temple has to be considered as a part and parcel of the park and as a place for relaxation, which reduces the mental stress of the people," held the court.
The petition was filed by one Jesudass Cornelius seeking a direction to the district authorities and municipal officials to maintain land reserved for park and playground purposes in an approved layout dating back to April 20, 1960. According to the petitioner, the authorities had failed in their obligation to preserve the designated open space and had allowed a Hindu temple to come up within the reserved area.
Before the court, the petitioner argued that the approved layout clearly earmarked portions of the land for recreational use, and any deviation from that plan defeated the purpose of such reservation. It was further contended that the temple was not part of the original layout plan and had been constructed in violation of planning norms.
The respondents, however, opposed the petition, submitting that the temple had been in existence for over five decades. They argued that the structure occupied only a small portion of the total land extent and did not prevent the remaining area from being used as a park or playground. The authorities also indicated that they were willing to examine the petitioner’s representations if relevant documents were furnished.
The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy, after considering the submissions and materials on record, noted that the layout had indeed reserved space for a park and playground. At the same time, the court found that the temple had been in existence for more than 50 years and that the petitioner had approached the court after an inordinate delay.
Court observed that public parks are essential for recreation, physical activity, and environmental balance, serving as important community spaces. However, it also noted that places of worship contribute to mental well-being and social cohesion. In this context, the court held that the temple, having been constructed with the support of the majority of residents and used continuously for decades, could not be treated as an illegal encroachment.
Significantly, court recorded that the temple occupied only a portion of the total 9000 sq. ft. land, leaving a substantial area available for park-related activities. It held that the existence of the temple did not impede the maintenance or use of the remaining land as a park and playground.
Rejecting the allegation of encroachment, the court concluded that the temple formed “part and parcel” of the park and served a public purpose. It further noted that disturbing the structure at this stage would affect the faith and beliefs of a large number of local residents.
Court also took a serious view of the timing and intent behind the petition. It observed that raising such objections after several decades indicated mala fide intent and appeared to be an attempt to create communal disharmony.
In light of these findings, court dismissed the writ petition and imposed costs of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioner. It directed that the amount be paid to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority within four weeks, failing which the district collector was instructed to initiate revenue recovery proceedings.
Also Read| Temple On Encroached Government Land Not Immune from Eviction: Madras High Court Dismisses Plea
Case Title: Jesudass Cornelius vs. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District and others
Order Date: March 4, 2026
Bench: Justice Krishnan Ramasamy