A.V.B.Prabhu v. The Secretary to Government

ORDER Leave granted. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, we are of the opinion that the word "work" as defined in Rule 2(iii)1 of the Management and Preservation of Properties of Religious Institutions Rules, 19642, is within and not beyond the rule making power of the state government in terms of sections 116(1)3, 116(2)

(xvii) and 116(2)(xix)4 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 19595. 1 "2. Definitions. - In these Rules, XXX XXXXXX

(iii) "work" means work relating to the construction, repair, alterations, conservation or renovation of any building or other structure belonging to a religious institution including its premises or work to facilitate irrigation and increase irrigation facilities but not any gopuram, vimanam, stone mantapam or other stone structure with stucco works belonging to it." …… The preamble signifying the object and purpose of the 1959 Act states:- "An Act to amend and consolidate the law relating to the administration and governance of the Hindu Religious and Charitable institution and Endowments in the State of Tamil Nadu." The High Court in the impugned judgment has rightly observed that the words "administration" and "governance" will include within its ambit "preservation, maintenance, management and improvement", which words also find reference in clause xvii to Section 116(2) of the 1959 Act. The exercise of rule-making power in the present case serves and promotes the object and purpose of the 1959 Act. According to us, the words "preservation, the maintenance, management and improvement" are broad and wide enough to include the contours of "work", as defined under Rule 2(iii) of the MPPRI Rules. Further, clause xix to Section 116(2) of the 1959 Act permits the government to make rules for the preservation of the images in the temples. Thus, the impugned rule is within the limits of authority conferred under Sections 116(1), 116(2)(xvii) and 116(2)

(xix) of the 1959 Act and does not extend beyond the scope or general operation of the 1959 Act. The impugned rule is intra vires the 1959 Act. However, we would state that the words "construction, repair, alterations, conservation, renovation" under clause (iii) to Rule 2 of the MPPRI Rules would take meaning and should not be read as empowering the authorities to go against or violate the provisions of any other enactment, rules or law, including those which is applicable to a particular temple, religious or charitable institution or endowment. Further, the authorities under the MPPRI Rules will have to comply with the relevant regulations or notifications, wherever applicable. Any alteration/modification made in the temple should not be contrary to or in contravention of any enactment or rules/regulations, which are applicable. Our attention is drawn to Rule 387 of the MPPRI Rules, which refers to the discretion vested with the Commissioner to consult with the Archaeological Survey of India regarding any building work. In our considered view, such consultation would have to be undertaken whenever required by the statutory rules/regulations. The discretion given to the Commissioner under Rule 38 of the MPPRI Rules is to be exercised in accordance with law. If there is an arbitrary exercise of power, it will be open to the petitioner or any other person to take recourse to appropriate remedy, as is available in law. ….

¶85Hence, appropriation of any portion, of either the current or accumulated surplus of the institution, for any, or more of the purposes specified, is not to exceed fifty per cent of the surplus income of the institution or ten per cent of the assessable income of the religious institution, whichever is less.

¶86There is to be a specific disclosure in respect of such deployment in the budget, as well as the statements accompanying the budget that must mandatorily contain details of all anticipated items of disbursement, including those expenditures coming within the ambit of Section 35(1)(a) and (b) and Section 36 of the Act. However in this case, we find no reference to the expenditure under the Iconic Project, in the budgets for the relevant years. The utilisation of the funds under the impugned Government Order and Proceedings thus constitutes illegal appropriation and diversion.

¶87On a reading of the provisions and Rules, and per our understanding, the priority to be followed in the financial planning and utilisation of funds of a religious institution is that, budgeting for current receipts and disbursements in the priority set out under Section 86(2) comes first, application as per Section 35 comes second, and appropriation as per Section 36 comes third, and last. We do not perceive any overlap between the nature of expenditures contemplated under the above provisions.

¶88That apart, the temple budget, in line with the requirements and priority set out under Section 86, is required statutorily to be prepared by the Board of trustees and placed before the Commissioner for approval. All the budgets produced before us have been prepared by either the Superintendent or the Zonal Inspection Officer. No resolution of the Trustee/Board indicating consultations with the accountants or authorizing the budget has been placed before us though specifically sought.

¶89The amounts involved are substantial viz., in excess of Rs.50 crores for each year. Though the HR&CE Service Rules provide for a separate Audit Department, we are told that the accounting in respect of all temples in the State of Tamil Nadu has presently been entrusted to management by the Local Fund Audit Department (in short, 'LFAD'). In fact, there are Rules, entitled the 'Appointment of Auditor Rules' notified under G.G.Ms.No.A-826 of 1961 that provide for the creation of an independent Audit wing of the HR & CE Department. We extract those Rules here:

¶87Accounts and Audit.—(1) The trustee of every religious institution shall keep regular accounts of all receipts and disbursement. Such accounts shall be kept for each fasli year separately and in such form and shall contain such particulars as may be specified by 1[the Commissioner].

(2) The accounts of every religious institution shall be audited by auditors appointed in the prescribed manner and such auditors shall be deemed to be public servants within the meaning of section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (Central Act XLV of 1860).

(3) The accounts of every religious institution, the annual income of which as calculated for the purposes of section 92 for the fasli year, immediately preceding is not less than 2[five lakhs rupees], shall be subject to concurrent audit, that is to say, the audit shall take place as and when the expenditure is incurred. The accounts of every other religious institution, the annual income of which calculated as aforesaid for the fasli year immediately preceding is not less than one thousand rupees, shall be audited annually, or if 1[the Commissioner] so directs in any case or class of cases at shorter intervals. …………..

¶90Rectification of defects disclosed in audit and order of surcharge against trustee, etc.—(1) The Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner], as the case may be, shall send a copy of every audit report relating to the accounts of a religious institution to the trustee thereof, and it shall be the duty of such trustee to remedy any defects or irregularities pointed out by the auditor and report the same to 1[the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner], as the case may be.

(2) If, on a consideration of the audit report and the report of the trustee and after such inquiry as may be necessary, the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, as the case may be, thinks that the trustee or any other person was guilty of irregular, illegal or improper expenditure, or of loss or waste of money or other property thereof caused by failure to recover moneys due or other property belonging to the religious institution or by neglect or misconduct or misapplication or collusion or fraudulent transactions or breach of trust, 1[the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner], as the case may be, may after giving notice to the trustee or such person to show cause why an order of surcharge should not be passed against him and after considering his explanation, if any, by order certify the amount so spent or the amount or value of the property so lost or wasted and direct the trustee or such person to pay within a specified time such amount or value personally: Provided that if, in respect of any expenditure or dealing with the property of the institution, the trustee or such person had obtained the directions of 1[the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner], as the case may be, and had acted in accordance with such directions, he shall not be held liable. ………… APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS RULES, (G. O. Ms. No. 3029, Revenue, dated the 20th July 1961) S.R.O. No. A-826 of 1961. - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (i) of sub section (2) of section 116 read with sub-section (2) of section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959), the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby makes the following rules, namely –

¶1These rules may be called the Appointment of Auditor Rules.

¶2Audit of the accounts of all religious institutions and charitable endowment under the control of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Department shall be done by independent Audit Wing created in the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Department, which will be under the immediate control of a Chief Audit Officer and under the ultimate control of the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Department.

¶90There is utter lack of clarity in the manner by which the audit is performed, and by whom. We are constrained to say this in the light of the records produced now and the fact that substantial expenses have been incurred without following the statutory process and the requirements under the Rules. As far as the LFAD is concerned, we are unaware of what the constituents of the LFAD are, how many Chartered Accountants and accountants are employed, and what the systems are for management of the financials and accounts of the religious institutions in the State.

¶91We call for the complete details in regard to the Local Fund Audit Department, and the Wing / Department concerned with the audit of the Religious Institutions, including but not restricted to the structure, number of employees and staff, and manner of functioning, forthwith, by way of a comprehensive status report to be filed within two weeks from today.

¶92The impugned Government order dated 08.03.2024 and work order dated 11.10.2024 stipulate the details of substantial expenditure to be incurred towards construction activities. As a concomitant, it is necessary that these expenditures should have been figured in the budgets of the relevant years that were presented before the Commissioner. Those budgets have been placed before us and we do not find any budgeting for these expenditures therein.

¶93The management of the enormous temple resources calls for a great amount of responsibility and circumspection on the part of the trustees who are expected to be persons of high stature, integrity and independence. Though the primary responsibility for the maintenance of finances, framing of budgets and deployment would fall upon the trustees, the Commissioner, HR&CE, has been vested with the ultimate authority to scrutinise and approve the budget.

¶94Thus there is an in-build check and balance to ensure that receipts are properly accounted for, and expenses budgeted after proper application of mind. The system is designed to control and check the possibility of abuse at either end. This is yet another reason why the control of funds is vested in the trustees on the one hand, and the power to sanction, on the other hand, with the Commissioner.

¶95There is a detailed procedure contemplated under Section 86 for the approval of the budget and provision is made for the exchange of views, clarifications, modifications to, and exclusion of expenses budgeted, prior to grant of approval. In this case, this procedure has not been followed. The budgeting is incomplete and incorrect and substantial funds have been spent even without approval. There is nothing in the budgets to even indicate that the authorities are aware of the Rules in this regard. The approach is casual and careless.

¶96We had, vide our order dated 18.11.2025 called for the audited accounts and the temple has produced copies of the statements of income filed, for income tax, along with the receipts and expenditure accounts and balance sheets for the periods 2021 to 2025 under a compilation dated 24.11.2025. To be noted that the annexures (R/E accounts and B/S) do not contain the seal or signature of the Auditor and there is no authentication of the same. We annexe the balance sheets for years ending 31.03.2021, 31.03.2022, 31.03.2023,

31.03.2024 and 31.03.2025 as Annexure A to this order.

¶97It is a matter of great concern that the accumulated surpluses have been reduced from a sum of Rs.96,60,59,638.63 as on years ending 31.3.2021 and 31.03.2022, and Rs.107,60,75,395 as on year ending 31.03.2023, to a sum of Rs.62,37,52,723.97 in year ending 31.03.2024. This reduction represents expenditure incurred without budgeting for the same, and is without the sanction or authority of law. It is a crime against the deity and a clear illustration of the fence eating the crops.

¶98In light of the detailed discussion as above, the impugned G.O. Ms.No.135, dated 08.03.2024 and proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No. 3400/2023/A2 dated 11.10.2024 are quashed. Issue (3) - Validity of the long standing presence of the Executive Officer appointed under order dated 29.05.1966, effective 16.07.1966.

¶99The temple has been in existence from time immemorial and we have been shown records of management by a Board of non-hereditary Trustees since the year 1801. A Scheme had been framed in Original Suit vide order dated 28.08.1932. However, with the enactment of the 1959 Act, the Scheme has lapsed.

¶100The appointment of Executive Officer was on 29.05.1966 and the order of appointment annexes a set of terms and conditions, extracted below. We are conscious of the length of the extract, but incorporate the same by way of an annexure (Annexure B), to showcase the attention to detail therein, to every minute aspect of temple management.

¶101Though the tenure of the last Board has expired in end-October 2025, there is nothing to show that proceedings have been initiated under Section 46 of the Act to constitute the new Board. We cannot fathom why there should be a time gap between the tenure of one Board to another. The authority is well aware of the tenure and hence proceedings for constitution of the successor Board must be taken even prior to the close of tenure, such that the successor board could step into its duties seamlessly.

¶102While it is the Board of Trustees that must have a constant presence to manage the temple, in this case, it is the Executive Officer, periodically, along with a Fit Person. This is contrary to the 2014 judgment in Dr.Subramanian Swamy's22 case where the Supreme Court has categorically defined the role of an Executive Officer, stating that an Executive Officer is to be brought in only when there is an impasse created in the management of the temple or some other circumstance necessitating quick intervention by the authorities.

¶103Such intervention is justified solely on the basis of the exigencies, and the appointment is hence temporary, to tide over those circumstances. Normalcy is to be restored at the earliest. Relevant observations of the Court are extracted below: . . . .

¶65Even if the management of a temple is taken over to remedy the evil, the management must be handed over to the person concerned immediately after the evil stands remedied. Continuation thereafter would tantamount to usurpation of their proprietary rights or violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution in favour of the persons deprived. Therefore, taking over of the management in such circumstances must be for a limited period. Thus, such an expropriatory order requires to be considered strictly as it infringes the fundamental rights of the citizens and would amount to divesting them of their legitimate rights to manage and administer the temple for an indefinite period. We are of the view that the impugned order

(2009) 4 LW 705, (2009) 8 MLJ 1503 is liable to be set aside for 22 Foot Note Supra (2) failure to prescribe the duration for which it will be in force.

¶66Supersession of rights of administration cannot be of a permanent enduring nature. Its life has to be reasonably fixed so as to be co-terminus with the removal of the consequences of maladministration. The reason is that the objective to take over the management and administration is not the removal and replacement of the existing administration but to rectify and stump out the consequences of maladministration. Power to regulate does not mean power to supersede the administration for indefinite period. …..

¶69We would also like to bring on record that various instances whereby acts of mismanagement / maladministration / misappropriation alleged to have been committed by Podhu Dikshitars have been brought to our notice. We have not gone into those issues since we have come to the conclusion that the power under the 1959 Act for appointment of an Executive Officer could not have been exercised in the absence of any prescription of circumstances/conditions in which such an appointment may be made. More so, the order of appointment of the Executive Officer does not disclose as for what reasons and under what circumstances his appointment was necessitated. Even otherwise, the order in which no period of its operation is prescribed, is not sustainable being ex-facie arbitrary, illegal and unjust.

¶104The Government has, in line with the contours of the role outlined for an Executive Officer by the Supreme Court, issued the Conditions for Appointment of Executive Officers Rules, 2015 (in short, 'EO Rules'), which prescribes a maximum term of appointment of an Executive Officer at a time, as five years. We extract below relevant portions of the Rules, as applicable to this case: CONDITIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS RULES, 2015. (G.O. Ms. No. 260, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE4-2), dated the6thNovember2015) No. SRO A-19(d)/2015.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (i) of sub-section (2) of section 116 read with section 43-A and sub-section (1) of section of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959), the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby makes the following rules:- RULES

¶1These rules may be called the Conditions for Appointment of Executive Officers Rules, 2015. …….

¶3Where the Commissioner either suo motu or upon the report received from the Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction, considers it necessary,-

(i) that in the interest of, and ensuring better, proper and efficient administration and management of, any religious institution; or

(ii) that he has reason to believe that there is persistent default in administering the affairs of any religious institution in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder; or

(iii) that there is irregularities, malfeasance, misfeasance or breach of trust; or

(iv) that there is malpractice, maladministration, mismanagement in any religious institution; or

(v) that there is misappropriation of, or improper dealing with the funds and the properties of, the religious institution; or

(vi) that there is gross neglect of any duty on the part of the trustee; or

(vii) that there is willful disobedience of the lawful orders issued under the provisions of the Act by the authorities under the Act or by the trustee; or

(viii) that if the trustee opts for the appointment of an Executive Officer to assist him in the better administration and development of the religious institution; or

(ix) that any scheme settled or deemed to have been settled to any religious institution under the provisions of the Act contains a clause as such ; or

(x) for any other reason, the Commissioner may, after holding such inquiry as he may consider it necessary and expedient, in the interest of such religious institution, by order, appoint an Executive Officer for such religious institution, for such period or periods as may be specified by the Commissioner in the order not exceeding a period of five years at a time. …….

¶7Notwithstanding anything contained in rule 3, the Commissioner may permit the Executive Officer to continue to discharge his administrative functions in accordance with the provisions of the Act,-

(i) till the circumstances warranting the appointment of an Executive Officer subsist as pointed out in rule 3, except clauses (viii) and (ix) of the said rule 3 stand remedied; or

(ii) till such time as the circumstances of the religious institution warrants; or

(iii) to assist the trustee, with his consent, for the purpose of ensuring better and efficient administration and management and the interest of the religious institution warrants for such continuation of the service of the Executive Officer. …….

¶9The salary, allowances and other conditions of service of the Executive Officer shall be governed by the rules framed by the Government under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and other rules and orders applicable to Government servants, as may be modified, from time to time. His salary, allowances, pension and remuneration, shall, at the first instance, be paid out of the Consolidated Fund of the State. The Commissioner shall, out of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Fund, repay to the Government such sums paid the Government.

¶105The continued presence of the Executive Officer from 1968 onwards till date, is thus not justified post 2015, as the authority ought to have taken stock of the position and brought the temple administration in line with the EO Rules. This has not been done.

¶106There is however a caveat as, if election/selection to the Board of Trustees is not done in a seamless manner, it is the management of the temple that would suffer. We cannot have a situation where there is a gap in the constitution of the Board, between the outgoing and successor, and no person in situ to manage the temple administration.

¶107Then again, if the tenure of the Board is only for two to five years, as it is in most cases, it would take some time for the Trustees to acclimatize themselves with the temple and its working and hence, the management of the temple may not be optimum as it would be dependent on the efficiency of the Trustees from one Board to the next. This is also not desirable.

¶108To strike a balance, we suggest that the Board members may retire in rotation, so that at any given point in time, at least one third of the members will continue from the old Board in order to provide continuity of thought and operation.

¶109Mr.Sriram has cited my decision in K.K.C.Singarachariyar Swamy V. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 34 and two others23, pointing out that, in that case, the Court has permitted joint management of the Sri Lakshmi Narasimhar Swamy Devasthanam, Sholinghur by the sole trustee and the Executive Officer having regard to the vastness of assets of that temple. He submits that since there is a precedent, such recourse may be taken in the present case as well. 23W.P. Nos.25562 of 2013 and 6715 of 2012

¶110To begin with, those observations were made in the context of a plea by an individual who claimed hereditary trusteeship. Hence, the observations in regard to the functioning of the Executive Officer are only incidental. That apart, the Court did not have the benefit of the either the EO Rules 2015, the Service Rules 2020 or the judgment in Dr.Subramanian Swamy's case at that time. Hence, the observations in K.K.C.Singarachariyar Swamy's case are distinguishable.

¶111Undoubtedly there is need for professional management of the temple assets under the guidance and advice of the Trustees appointed from time to time. The Kallazhagar temple owns, as do many temples in Tamil Nadu, a vast repository of assets including immovable property. The Trustees are undoubtedly expected to be persons of high standard and stature with a keen and deep interest in Hindu religion and spirituality.

¶112They are to be assisted by a team of efficient managers, also with knowledge of, and interest in the Hindu religion, to manage the temple assets and records on a day-to-day basis, who report to the Board of Trustees.

¶113A balance has to be achieved, and the answer is found in the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions (Officers and Servants) Service Rules, 2020 (in short, 'HR&CE Service Rules 2020'). The Rules provide for the appointment of several cadres of employees including Managers. There is a critical distinction between the appointment of an 'executive officer' and a 'manager' and the distinction is not merely normative.

¶114The appointment of an Executive Officer is by the Government to whom he/she reports. The Manager is, however, appointed by the Board of Trustees and reports to them. The loyalty of the Manager is thus to the temple and its Board and this is critical to the separation that has to be maintained between temple and State. It is a distinction that flows from Constitutional principles, and one that must not be effaced.

¶115In conclusion, we direct:

(i) Immediate measures be taken for constitution of new Board of Trustees in line with the observations/directions supra.

(ii) Necessary amendments in line with the observations supra be made to bring the management of Kallazhagar temple in line with the Act and Rules, forthwith.

¶116Both Justice C.Kumarappan and myself had had the opportunity of viewing the status of the project on separate occasions when we had visited the temple. The purpose of our visit was religious, but we seized the chance to acquaint ourselves with the project first hand. There are marked differences in the topography as it stands now and as depicted in the map in the 1925 Sthalapuranam.

¶117While we do not intend that the temple premises should stand frozen in time with no infrastructure provided for the safety and comfort of devotees and visitors, we are very clear that whatever is done in the name of development should align with the ethos of a temple generally, and with the Azhagar temple specifically, as we have noted from the Sthalapuranam and the maps therein.

¶118Though we have quashed the Government Order and the consequential proceedings, it may not be in the interests of the temple to direct status quo ante in regard to the entirety of the new constructions under the project. We hence issue the following directions. Our directions follow the route that one would take if one enters the temple from the Rakkayi Amman Koil road, which is the road leading to Pazhamudhir Solai, Nupura Ganga and Rakkayi Amman koil and follow the path towards Rayar Mottai Gopuram, turn into Mayya Veedhi Central Main Road, exit and turn into East and West Temple Car street, to the end point. The map as in the Sthalapuranam, and the map now furnished by the authorities are set out below for ease of reference and a better understanding of the topography. Enter Here

(i) On entry, one sees that a portion of the fort/temple wall has been torn down, ostensibly as it was in need of repairs. The incomplete portions of the wall shall be completed expeditiously, using the original stones which are found scattered in heaps abutting the walls. This exercise shall be completed expeditiously and, in any event, within three months from today.

(ii) The Vasantha Mandapam is on one's left. The area around the Vasantha Mandapam is full of construction rubble, including masonry and metal rods. They shall be cleared forthwith and the landscaping restored with appropriate vegetation.

(iii) The Vasantha Mandapam is a beautiful structure where the deities are taken in procession during the month of Vaikasi. Though we are told that this tradition is being followed till date, it remains a mystery as to how the rituals inside the Vasantha Mandapam are performed, as the place is packed with odds and ends including construction implements. Clearly, it is being used as a dumping place and we are told that miscellaneous materials, are housed here. This has to stop. The place shall be cleared forthwith and valuable materials, such as the Theppam (floats) that are stored there shall be carefully moved to an alternate location, identified as a permanent place for their storage.

(iv) There is a moat that runs around the platform in the Vasantham Mandapam where the deities will be placed during the rituals. The moat must be maintained spotlessly, such that it may be filled with water at the appropriate times.

(v) The Sthalapuram refers to Vasantha Mandapam at S.No.59 as a Vasantha Mantapam with its famous Mural Paintings. It pains us to see the famous Mural Paintings partly covered with white wash. The walls of the Mandapam have paintings depicting scenes from the Mahabharatha. We are unaware of the antiquity of the paintings but even to the naked eye, they are not maintained. The trustees and authorities shall consult experts to ensure that whatever is left of the paintings are preserved and restored. This shall be done expeditiously.

(vi) The entirety of the directions relating to the Vasantha Mandapam and the adjoining areas shall be carried out expeditiously, and with a sense of urgency, in a phased manner, such that the Mandapam is restored in time for the Vaikasi festival this year.

(vii) We are told that there is a Nandavanam, the entrance of which adjoins the Vasantha Mandapam, and that encompasses the area behind the Vasantha Mandapam. We trust that this Nandavanam is being maintained in a manner becoming of a temple Nandavanam.

(viii) On the other side of the road, opposite the Vasantha Mandapam, there is an area with protruding metal rods and rudimentary masonry, as a prelude to construction of a restaurant and Archakar's quarters. These shall be removed forthwith. Both are at nascent stages of construction.

(ix) As one moves forward, there are miscellaneous constructions on the left and an old toilet, opposite which there is an arch and an area called Periyazhwar's Thiruvarasu. On a comparison with the old map, this is exactly at the point the original Periyalwar Nandavanam is situated (Sl.No.54 on the map). This place now is marked as Parking 2, Restaurant 2 and has a children's playground with play equipment. The parking area and land earmarked for restaurant shall be restored to a Nandavanam, appropriate to the temple. Since the children's park has been completed and is functional, this will remain.

(x) The Rayar Mottai Gopuram on the left is overgrown with vegetation and we are informed that a Government Order has been issued allocating funds for restoration. In fact (i) G.O.Ms.No.171, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE4.1) Department, dated 16.03.2024, (ii) G.O.Ms.No.557, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE1-1) Department, dated

24.12.2024, (iii) Na.Ka.No.726521/2024/Q5 dated 25.09.2024, (iv) Na.Ka.No. 770151/2024/Q5 dated 30.09.2024 and G.O.Ms.No.557 Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (mep1?1) Department dated 24.12.2024 have been issued allotting funds for restoration of various works in the Kallazhagar temple. The funds shall be allocated forthwith and work for restoration shall commence immediately, under the guidance of the experts.

(xi) Opposite the Rayar Mottai Gopuram is the old bus shed and alongside are a series of new shops and new toilets. The shops and toilets are part of the Iconic Project. Since the construction is complete and the positioning of the shops and toilets is alongside the bus shed, which sees a tremendous footfall of devotees/visitors to the temple, this will remain.

(xii) Turning right into the Mayya Veedhi, there are new and old constructions on both sides of the road. On the left is an old Kalyana Mandapam, behind which, there is a proposal for a restaurant and rudimentary new construction that shall be removed and the area cleared of debris.

(xiii) Next in line is the old guest house that is very poorly maintained. The same shall be cleaned, spruced up and maintained appropriately. There is a new guest house referred to as VIP Guest House in the map. Since this is alongside the existing guest house on the Mayya Veedhi, this will remain. Needless to say, it shall be used without distinction, to accommodate the needs of all devotees and visitors.

(xiv) As one makes a U turn to the opposite side of the Mayya Veedhi, there is a row of staff quarters extending all the way till the middle of the road. Many of the houses are abutted by unseemly and ugly sheds made of corrugated sheets. The sheds shall be removed forthwith.

(xv) The Karunai Illam and two sheds are next, followed by the quarters for the Executive Officer, and the post office. In between the staff quarters is an ancient Karumari Amman Temple which is dilapidated. There are no efforts to restore and maintain the same. This shall be attended to forthwith and a status report filed, after consultation with the experts.

(xvi) The encroachments on either side of the Mayya Veedhi have led to the disappearance of Sadirilamadavar Sannidhi (Sl.Nos.56), Sri Lakshmana Kalanjiyam (Sl.No.30), Thirumalai Nayak's Mantapam, housing the Statue of Thirumalai Nayak and Muthalu Nayak with their consorts (Sl.No.40), Sri Srinivasan's Sannidhi Ruins (Sl.No.41) and Minor Shrines (S.No.60). It is undoubtedly the periodic foray of construction over the years that have led to the disappearance of these ancient monuments. This too has got to stop.

(xvii) Exiting the Mayya Veedhi, one turns right into the East Temple Car Road where there are the school buildings (Arulmigu Sundaraja High School Alagarkoil), school facilities and new school block on the left. (xviii) There is a humungous cluster of buildings next to the new school block referred to as the Virundhu Mandapam. This houses several multipurpose halls and other facilities, including toilets, electrical rooms, booking offices, an RO plant and a slaughterhouse, as per the description on the map. We are given to understand that this is in operation now and provides facilities for cooking for those who have undertaken vows to be performed in the temple.

(xix) There are two tin sheds on the right side of the Mayya Veedhi supplying vessels and implements on hire for preparation of the food to be served in the Virundhu Mandapam. The shop shall be shifted to the inside of the Virundhu Mandapam forthwith and the present tin sheds cleared.

(xx) In the course of the discussion, one of the points raised by the petitioners related to the applicability of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and enactments governing the operation of Slaughter Houses in the State. The map furnished by the authorities contains a space ear-marked as 'slaughter house' in the Virundhu Mandapam.

(xxi) Though there were some peripheral objections raised by the respondents to the submissions of the petitioners, the parties have not been heard in detail on this point. We also conscious of the fact that this is an aspect that touches upon the faith of devotees, as animal slaughter has long been part of worship in the temples.

(xxii) For the above reasons, we do not wish to render any finding on this aspect in this matter. We, however, direct the authorities to examine this aspect of the matter and take an appropriate decision having regard to relevant Statutes and Rules. (xxiii) On a comparison of the plan in the Sthalapuram and the Master Plan given now, we find that the area occupied by the development on the either side of the Mayya Veedhi (Central Main Road) itself constitutes an encroachment of temple property. As per the original plan, that area housed Sadirilamadavar Sannidhi (Sl.Nos.56), Sri Lakshmana Kalanjiyam (Sl.No.30), Thirumalai Nayak's Mantapam, housing the Statue of Thirumalai Nayak and Muthalu Nayak with their consorts (Sl.No.40), Sri Srinivasan's Sannidhi Ruins (Sl.No.41) and Minor Shrines (S.No.60).

(xxiv) However, the Thirumalai Nayak's Mantapam, the Statues of Thirumalai Nayak, Muthalu Nayak, their consorts and the minor shrines are nowhere to be seen. The trustees and the authorities shall take all measures to see whether those Statues have been preserved and shall report in this regard. Be that as it may, it is too late to put the clock now, and we direct that henceforth, it shall be ensured that there is no encroachment in the name of development.

(xxv) The proposed new staff quarters are located right next to the Agni Pushkarani and does not take into account the fact that human habitation with all consequences, including generation of sewage and other incidents of human life, would taint that area. The existing provision for staff quarters is more than adequate for the present staff.

(xxvi) Agni Pushkarani or Moolavavi is referred to as Sri Narayana Pushkarani and 'Perumal Urani' (Sl.No.48) in the map in the Sthalapuram. Now that area has been demarcated in the Project Plan as vehicle parking with toilets adjoining the same. Agni Pushkarani or Moolavavi is separately shown as Sl.No.44 in the original plan. Today, there is no Perumal Urani or Narayana Pushkarani in the premises. All that remains is the Agni Pushkarani in the location marked as Sl.No.44. The staff quarters ought to not to have been placed in such close proximity to the Agni Pushkarani. For the reasons set out at point (xxv) above, and since the expenditure on staff quarters is itself not budgeted or sanctioned, this proposal is quashed. The amount spent on this construction thus far shall be quantified / reimbursed by the State to the Temple forthwith. (xxvii) The same reasoning applies to the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP). It is the say of the authorities that that is the lowest point in the entire complex and was hence identified as the ideal location for STP. Even so, we are of the considered view that STP cannot be located in such proximity to the Agni Push-karani. Hence, it is for the authorities to locate an appropriate area elsewhere. We are especially pained by the evident lack of sense and sensitivity on the part of the authorities in the placement of the staff quarters and sewage treatment plant right next to the holy Theertham of the temple. (xxviii) The fort/temple wall along the south main entrance (Vandi gate entrance) has been torn down, ostensibly for repairs. The wall is incomplete and shall be completed using the original stones that are found cluttered there. This exercise shall be completed forthwith.

(xxix) At the entrance to the temple, there is a narrow channel with water running along it and metal bars at intervals to control ingress and egress of devotees. The area is unhygienic and has a bad odour. The purpose of the water channel is for devotees to wash their feet as they enter the temple. The purpose is totally lost as the water there will only contaminate the feet even more. This must be addressed forthwith by the authorities and proper provision must be made in this regard forthwith.

¶119Learned Advocate General has fairly acceded to the position that temples/temple authorities are not exempt from obtaining necessary approvals for construction, and the construction activity has been undertaken without the permission of the Local authorities. He also assures the Court that clearances will be obtained henceforth and no developmental activity will be undertaken without necessary approvals being sought and obtained. We record this undertaking. In fact, on this ground too, the entirety of the Iconic Project and the constructions thereunder, are tainted for lack of necessary approval from the concerned authorities.

¶120Learned Advocate General also assures the Court that the approval of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) will be obtained in cases where it is necessary, and accedes to the position that some construction has taken place very proximate to ASI protected monuments in the Sri Kallazhagar complex, such as next to the Nayakar Mahal, and that such construction will be removed immediately. This is also recorded. Let the needful be done forthwith.

¶121If all developmental measures could follow a simple rule, of aligning as closely and as practically as possible, with the earliest pictorial version of the temple as available with the temple, it could be ensured that developmental projects will preserve and add to the divine beauty of the temple and not be an exercise to vandalize the same. For instance, the location of the Kodai Thirunal Mandapam (Sl. No.24 in the old map in the Sthalapuram) is now referred to as Annadhana Mandapam. While the activity of Annadhanam is laudable, it is preferable to retain the original name and purpose of the Mandapam. So too in several other instances.

¶122All directions under this order unless specifically mentioned, shall be complied with within three (3) months from date of receipt of this order and a compliance report filed with the Registry. We thank all learned counsel, Mr.Narasimhan, Mr.T.R.Ramesh for their valuable inputs in the matter.

¶123These writ petitions as also the connected miscellaneous petitions are allowed. No costs. [A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,]

23.01.2026 sm/ta/sl Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To

1.The Secretary to Government, Religious Endowments Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, 119, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034.

3.The Executive Officer, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District.

4.The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Tourism, Culture & Religious Endowments, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

5.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, Ellis Nagar, Madurai - 625 001. ANNEXURE - A ANNEXURE-B Proceeding of the Commissioner, HR & CE (Admn.) Department, Madras-34. Present:

Sri.

Ms.SarangapaniMudaliar,

B.A.,B.L., Commissioner. Sub:D.Dis.14578/66 Dated 29.05.1966. Sub: Establishment - Executive Officer - appointment of Executive Officer under Sec. 45 of the HR & CE Act 1959 (Madras Act 22 of 1959) Sri Kallalagar Devasthanam, Alagarkoil, Melur Taluk, Madurai District - Executive Officer – under sec. 45 appointed – powers and duties defined – orders passed. Ref.: From the Trustees, Consent Letter dt. 28.02.1966 From the Deputy Commissioner, Madras RC.No.18615/66-A, dated

21.03.1966. **** In exercise of the powers vested in him under sec. 45 of the HR & CE Act 1959 (Madras Act 22 of 1959) the Commissioner, HR & CE Madras hereby directs the appointment of an Executive Officer to Sri Kallalagar Devasthanam, Alagarkoil, Melur Taluk, Madurai District. 3) The Commissioner further defines the powers and duties of the Executive Officer and trustees under sec. 45(2) and (3) as set out in the appendix to the order. This order will take effect from 16.07.1966. Sd/- M.S. Sarangapani, Commissioner / true copy/ Sub : Powers and duties - Executive Officer appointed under sec. 45 of the Act and the non-hereditary trustees defined. **** In exercise of the powers vested in him under sec. 45(2) of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (Madras Act 22 of 1959) the Commissioner, HR & CE Admn. Department, Madras defines the powers and duties to be exercised and performed respectively by the Executive Officer and the non-hereditary trustees of the above temple, as detailed below: Rule 1: The Executive Officer, Manager or other person designated as Executive Officer by the Commissioner shall be in-charge of all immovable properties of the institution. Rule 2: The Executive Officer shall be entitled to the custody of all immovables livestock and grains. The jewels and valuable shall be in joint custody in the manner laid down in the rules framed under section 116(2)

(xii) and the Executive Officer shall be responsible for the entrustment of jewels and valuables which are in daily use as well as those which are not used daily, to office holders, after taking proper acknowledgement and for providing facilities to office holders for keeping the jewels and jewels and valuables in safety and for observing the prescribed procedure after such entrustment. Rule 3: The Executive Officer shall be the person entitled to receive all the incomes in cash and kind and all offerings. All such incomes and offerings shall be in his custody. Rule 4(a): The Executive Officer shall be person by whom all disbursements are to be made and all expenditure to be incurred on behalf of the institution.

(b) Before the end of every month, the Executive Officer shall draw up a rough estimate of the probable disbursements and expenses to be made and incurred during the following month and obtain the previous sanction of the trustees for the same. The Executive officer shall there after prepare cheques in instalments for the funds required, obtain the signature of the Chairman of the Board of Trustees and withdraw the amount from the bank. The amount so drawn shall be deposited then and there in a bank in a separate account or in the postal savings bank account in the name of the temple and the trustees shall be a resolution authorizes the Executive Officer to operates on this account. The amount in the account to be operated upto by the executive Officer shall under no circumstances exceed the limit to be fixed by the Deputy Commissioner in consultation with the trustees of the institution. Such limit shall not exceed one twelfth of the annual expenditure of the temple. Where any amount of expenditure included in the statement can be disbursed by means of cheque in favour of the persons to whom the payment has to be made. All the receipts must be deposited by the Executive Officer in account of the institution in the name of the Chairman, Board of Trustees. All such receipts ever and above the limits prescribed under the rules under section 116(2)(i) of the Act shall be invested properly as per rules in long term or in short term as may be decided by the trustees without causing loss to the institution. Rule 4(c): In case of non-co-operation by the Chairman of Board of Trustees in the issue of cheques for the amounts required for disbursement and expenditure during a month or any other specific item, the Deputy Commissioner may authorize the Executive Officer to deposit the receipts in his account and incur expenditure for such period as he considers necessary, after satisfying himself that such an authorization is necessary in the interests of administration of the institution. Rule 4(d) - For meeting unforeseen expenditure the Executive Officer shall have such permanent advance as may be fixed by the Deputy Commissioner. The Executive Officer shall not incur any expenditure which exceeds Rs.10/- without obtaining prior sanction of the trustees. In cases of emergency he may incur the expenditure, but shall without delay obtain the approval of the trustees. Rule 4(e): The Accounts of all receipts and expenditure in a month shall be placed before the trustees at the monthly meetings for being passed by them. Rule 5: The Executive Officer shall prepare the budget sufficient time, obtain the approval of the trustees and submit it for sanction. Similarly supplemental budget and proposal for ratification of expenditure incurred in excess of the budget sanction due to extra ordinary circumstances should also be submitted through the Trustees. Rule 6 (a): All the office holders and servants shall work under the immediate control and superintendence of the Executive Officer subject to the disciplinary control of the trustees under section 56 of the Act. Rule 6(b) The service Registers of all office holders shall be maintained by the Executive Officer. Rule 7: The Executive Officer shall be in-charge of the office of the institution. He shall be responsible for the proper maintenance of all records, accounts and registers and for the due submission to the appropriate authorities of the budget reports, accounts, returns or other information which are required to be submitted by the trustees under Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Rule 8: The Executive Officer shall be responsible for the collection of all incomes and moneys due to the institution. He shall have no power to waive or write off any claims of the institution. Claims for write off or remission shall be made through the trustees to the competent authority. Rule 9: The Executive Officer shall be the person entitled to sue or be sued on behalf of the temple. It shall be the duty of the Executive Officer to see that all legal proceedings on behalf of or against the institution are instituted in due time and properly prosecuted and that all such proceedings against the institution are properly defended. He should not in accordance with resolutions of the trustees and also obtain prior sanction of the competent authority wherever necessary. Rule 10: It shall be the duty of Executive Officer to see that all the office holders and servants properly do their allotted work. Rule 11: It shall be the duty of the Executive Officer to see that buildings, lands, Jewels, vahanams and utensils of the institution are kept in proper repairs. Rule 12: The Executive Officer shall have power to sell perishables in such manner as he deems fit. Sales of livestock grains or any other property not required for the use of the institution shall be decided upon only by the trustees and the Executive Officer shall make the sales inn such manner as he decided upon by the trustee. The conditions of lease of land rights, etc. shall be settled at a meeting of the trustees as laid down under the rules framed under sec. 116(2) (xiii) of the Act. Rule 13: The Executive Officer may exercise all powers and may perform all duties assigned to an Executive Officer under the scheme if any settled for the institution and also perform such functions as are allotted to him by the trustee except those which are required to be exercised or performed by the trustees under the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Rule 14: The salary allowance and other conditions of service of the Executive Officer shall be governed by the rules framed by Government under section 45(1) and 116(2) (xvi) and other rules applicable to Government Servants as may be modified from time to time. Rule 15: The Chairman of the Board of Trustees shall have power to operate on the bank account but the cheque book and the pass book shall remain the custody of the Executive Officer. The Executive Officer shall have separate account in his name as provided under rule 4(b) of these rules and the same shall be operated upon by him. Rule 16: Except as provided for in his order, the trustees may exercise all powers and shall perform all duties assigned to them under the Act and the rules framed thereunder. Rule 17: The following subjects shall be placed by the Executive Officer at every monthly meeting. a) Checking of cash, perishables and noting the fact in the minutes book (2) passing of previous month's accounts and recording the abstract of the same, (3) Other subjects to be brought by the Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board of Trustees or any other Trustee. b) 1)Quarterly statements of accounts, 2) Demand, Collection and balance statement, 3) Improvements to buildings and lands and 4) Additions to jewellery 5) Investments made or renewed. c) Once in every year in the month of March, the following subjects shall be placed before the meeting. 1) Budget, 2) Dhittam, 3) Programme of festivals, 4) Proposals for repairs to building d) Once in every year in the month of August, the following shall be placed before the meeting. 1) Administration report 2) Account of festivals 2) A statement showing alterations, additions or Omissions required in Sec.29 as laid down in Sec. 30. e) Audit notes and replies to be placed before the meeting at the next month after receipt. Rule 18: Save in so far as in expressly provide for herein the provisions of the Madras HR & CE Act 1959 and rules framed thereunder as amended from time to time shall apply to the institutions and its endowments. Rule 19: If any doubt or difficulty arises, either in the interpretation of these rules or the application thereof such doubts or difficulties shall be removed by the Commissioner and the order of the Commissioner in this behalf shall be final. Sd/-xxxxx Commissioner /true copy/

DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. sm/ta/sl W.P.(MD)Nos.23501 & 22596 of 2025 Dated: 23.01.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON: 28.11.2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 23.01.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THEHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN W.P.(MD)Nos.23501 & 22596 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.20782 of 2025 W.P.(MD)No.23501 of 2025 A.V.B.Prabhu ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Secretary to Government, Religious Endowments Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, 119, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. 3.The Executive Officer, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. 4.V.R.Venkatachalam, Chairman of Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. 5.R.Pandiyarajan Member of Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. 6.A.Senthilkumar, Member of Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. 7.P.Ravikumar, Member of Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. 8.Meenakshi Priyanth, Member of Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District. ... Respondents (Respondents 4 to 8 are suo motu impleaded vide order of this Court dated 22.10.2025 in W.P.(MD)No.23501 of 2025) PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to Na.Ka.No.3400/2023/A2 dated 11.10.2024 issued by the third respondent herein, the Regional Joint Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai Region in respect of Civil Works pertaining to Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai District and quash the same as being in violation of Section 36 read with Section 66(1) and Section 86(2) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, the Management and Preservation of Properties of Religious Institutions Rules framed under the said 1959 Act, Section 11(1) and (3) of the Tamil Nadu Heritage Commission Act, 2012, the law laid down by a Full Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its order dated 12.03.2024 in SLP(c)No. 9495 of 2022 and the dictum of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court laid down in its order dated 09.01.2025 in W.P.No.19084 of 2025 and further order restoration of the funds of temple utilized without any authority of law for the civil works in the said Temple. For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Venkatesan for Mr.RM.Arun Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.P.S.Raman. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader (for R1 & R2) : Mr.A.K.Sriram Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Manohar (for R3 and R4 to R8) W.P.(MD)No.22596 of 2025 Venkatesh Sowrirajan ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Tourism, Culture & Religious Endowments, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, 119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Department, Ellis Nagar, Madurai - 625 001. 4.The Executive Officer, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai - 625 301. 5.The Board of Trustees, Sri Kallazhagar Temple, Azhagarkoil, Madurai - 625 301. 6.Rangarajan Narasimhan, AranganThirumutram, Kollidam Road, 400 meters west of AndavanAshramam, Srirangam, Trichy - 620 006. ... Respondents (Respondent No.6 impleaded vide order of this Court dated 22.10.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)No. 20782 of 2025 in W.P.(MD)No.22596 of 2025) PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to G.O Ms.No.135, dated 08.03.2024, issued by the 1st Respondent and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 and consequently restrain the Respo