High Court · 2025

Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 01.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWrit Petition No.22177 of 2025and W.M.P.No.24957 of 20251.Thathadesikar Thiruvamsathar Sabha No.8-B, Sannithi Street, Little Kanchipuram, Kancheepuram - 631 501. represented by its Secretary Mr.T.K.Sampath Kumaran2.T.K.Sampath Kumaran... PetitionersVs.1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 112, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 11/20, A.K.Thangavelar Street, Kanchipuram - 631 501.3.The Executive Trustee, Sri Devaraja Swamy Temple, Kanchipuram - 631 501. ... RespondentsWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from carrying out any construction/renovation activities that affect the heritage value and aesthetics of the subject temple, or are contrary to the 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025Agamas, and without adhering to the directions prescribed under G.O.(Ms) No.171, dated 29.06.2013 issued by the Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (MA2) Department, as well as other applicable provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.For Petitioners: Mr.Niranjan Rajagoplan for G.R.AssociatesFor Respondents: Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate [R1 & R2] Mr.K.V.Babu [R3]*****O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from carrying out any construction or renovation activity that affects the heritage value/aesthetics of Sri Devarajaswamy Temple and to continue with any work, which is contrary to the Agamas and without adhering to the directions prescribed in G.O.(Ms).No.171 dated 29.06.2013 as well as the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. 2. Heard Mr.Niranjan Rajagoplan, learned counsel for petitioners, Mr.K.Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.K.V.Babu, learned counsel appearing for third respondent.3. The main grievance expressed by learned counsel for 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025petitioners is that the respondents failed to take note of the fact that the proposed construction/renovation infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. According to petitioners, a proposal is made to construct a fixed pedestrian bridge connecting the Garbagraha and the outer corridor. There is lot of significance in the six steps which a devotee has to climb to reach the Garbagraha. If the same is completely replaced with the ramp, it will go against the fundamental rights of petitioners.4. Learned counsel further submitted that the pedestrian bridge that is proposed to be fixed will affect the mural paintings, heritage and sanctity of the temple. It is stated that all these decisions have been taken by the respondents without considering the objections raised and it goes against the right to worship guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing on 20.06.2025, this Court directed the third respondent to file a counter affidavit and explain the nature of work that is carried out in the temple. Accordingly, a counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent. On carefully going through the same, it is seen that three solutions were considered for proceeding further with the work and it was ultimately 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025decided that the work will be carried out without affecting the temples agamic heritage. Accordingly, the steps which were found to be steep and risky and were not suitable for elderly people and differently abled persons, a decision was taken to fix a temporary ramp. This will enable the elderly people and differently abled persons to easily reach the Garbagraha and offer their prayers. It is also stated that serious difficulties and hurdles that were faced in the past were taken into consideration while taking this decision. It is further stated in the counter that the way leading to the Golden Lizard was found to be most challenging since the crowd management in this place was getting more difficult. In order to deal with the same and to ensure that all those devotees have a satisfying darshan in the temple and to manage the crowd especially during the peak season, the pedestrian bridge is proposed to be constructed which is not in violation of any agamic tradition and it is in accordance with the tradition and customs of the temple. That apart, this pedestrian bridge is required for evacuation process during emergency situation to provide first aid to devotees.Hence, lot of thought process went behind before taking the decision. It is 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025further mentioned in the affidavit that no murals, sannidhi or deities will be disturbed in the process and the entire work is carried on only after getting expert opinion from the traditional office bearers including Sthalathars, Archakar and Sthaligas.5. The grievance expressed by the petitioner as against the proposed work that is going to be carried out is not against any agamic traditions and this is done only with a view to help the devotees to have a proper darshan. The work that is going to be carried out does not in any way affect the heritage and the spiritual elements of the temple. Ultimately, the authorities have taken into consideration the elderly persons, who visit the temple and also those who are differently abled. They have also taken into consideration the emergency situation that may arise during peak season where large crowd throngs the temple.6. The counter affidavit filed by the third respondent is taken into consideration and this Court is satisfied with the steps that are being taken and this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the work that are carried out by the respondents. While doing so, this Court also N.ANAND VENKATESH, J5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025gmrecords the undertaking given by the third respondent temple to the effect that no damage will be caused to heritage structure and sanadhi, dieties and murals will not be disturbed in the said process.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.01.07.2025Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdergmTo1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 112, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 11/20, A.K.Thangavelar Street, Kanchipuram - 631 501.3.The Executive Trustee, Sri Devaraja Swamy Temple, Kanchipuram - 631 501.Writ Petition No.22177 of 20256/6

Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 01.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWrit Petition No.22177 of 2025and W.M.P.No.24957 of 20251.Thathadesikar Thiruvamsathar Sabha No.8-B, Sannithi Street, Little Kanchipuram, Kancheepuram - 631 501. represented by its Secretary Mr.T.K.Sampath Kumaran2.T.K.Sampath Kumaran... PetitionersVs.1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 112, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 11/20, A.K.Thangavelar Street, Kanchipuram - 631 501.3.The Executive Trustee, Sri Devaraja Swamy Temple, Kanchipuram - 631 501. ... RespondentsWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from carrying out any construction/renovation activities that affect the heritage value and aesthetics of the subject temple, or are contrary to the 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025Agamas, and without adhering to the directions prescribed under G.O.(Ms) No.171, dated 29.06.2013 issued by the Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (MA2) Department, as well as other applicable provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.For Petitioners: Mr.Niranjan Rajagoplan for G.R.AssociatesFor Respondents: Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate [R1 & R2] Mr.K.V.Babu [R3]*****O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from carrying out any construction or renovation activity that affects the heritage value/aesthetics of Sri Devarajaswamy Temple and to continue with any work, which is contrary to the Agamas and without adhering to the directions prescribed in G.O.(Ms).No.171 dated 29.06.2013 as well as the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. 2. Heard Mr.Niranjan Rajagoplan, learned counsel for petitioners, Mr.K.Karthikeyan, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.K.V.Babu, learned counsel appearing for third respondent.3. The main grievance expressed by learned counsel for 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025petitioners is that the respondents failed to take note of the fact that the proposed construction/renovation infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. According to petitioners, a proposal is made to construct a fixed pedestrian bridge connecting the Garbagraha and the outer corridor. There is lot of significance in the six steps which a devotee has to climb to reach the Garbagraha. If the same is completely replaced with the ramp, it will go against the fundamental rights of petitioners.4. Learned counsel further submitted that the pedestrian bridge that is proposed to be fixed will affect the mural paintings, heritage and sanctity of the temple. It is stated that all these decisions have been taken by the respondents without considering the objections raised and it goes against the right to worship guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing on 20.06.2025, this Court directed the third respondent to file a counter affidavit and explain the nature of work that is carried out in the temple. Accordingly, a counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent. On carefully going through the same, it is seen that three solutions were considered for proceeding further with the work and it was ultimately 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025decided that the work will be carried out without affecting the temples agamic heritage. Accordingly, the steps which were found to be steep and risky and were not suitable for elderly people and differently abled persons, a decision was taken to fix a temporary ramp. This will enable the elderly people and differently abled persons to easily reach the Garbagraha and offer their prayers. It is also stated that serious difficulties and hurdles that were faced in the past were taken into consideration while taking this decision. It is further stated in the counter that the way leading to the Golden Lizard was found to be most challenging since the crowd management in this place was getting more difficult. In order to deal with the same and to ensure that all those devotees have a satisfying darshan in the temple and to manage the crowd especially during the peak season, the pedestrian bridge is proposed to be constructed which is not in violation of any agamic tradition and it is in accordance with the tradition and customs of the temple. That apart, this pedestrian bridge is required for evacuation process during emergency situation to provide first aid to devotees.Hence, lot of thought process went behind before taking the decision. It is 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025further mentioned in the affidavit that no murals, sannidhi or deities will be disturbed in the process and the entire work is carried on only after getting expert opinion from the traditional office bearers including Sthalathars, Archakar and Sthaligas.5. The grievance expressed by the petitioner as against the proposed work that is going to be carried out is not against any agamic traditions and this is done only with a view to help the devotees to have a proper darshan. The work that is going to be carried out does not in any way affect the heritage and the spiritual elements of the temple. Ultimately, the authorities have taken into consideration the elderly persons, who visit the temple and also those who are differently abled. They have also taken into consideration the emergency situation that may arise during peak season where large crowd throngs the temple.6. The counter affidavit filed by the third respondent is taken into consideration and this Court is satisfied with the steps that are being taken and this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the work that are carried out by the respondents. While doing so, this Court also N.ANAND VENKATESH, J5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.22177 of 2025gmrecords the undertaking given by the third respondent temple to the effect that no damage will be caused to heritage structure and sanadhi, dieties and murals will not be disturbed in the said process.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.01.07.2025Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdergmTo1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 112, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Board, 11/20, A.K.Thangavelar Street, Kanchipuram - 631 501.3.The Executive Trustee, Sri Devaraja Swamy Temple, Kanchipuram - 631 501.Writ Petition No.22177 of 20256/6