Madras High Court Condemns Failure to Protect Temple Lands in Karur District
The Madras High Court has issued a stern rebuke to officials for their persistent failure to execute effective measures aimed at removing encroachments from the lands belonging to the Balasubramaniya Swamy temple located in Vennaimalai, within the Karur district. The court emphasized that a deity, recognized as a juristic person under the law, cannot be left without remedy simply because it lacks voting rights.
Court's Strong Observations on Temple Endowments
During the hearing of a contempt petition filed by A Radhakrishnan in 2024, a division bench comprising Justice P Velmurugan and Justice B Pugalendhi made poignant remarks. The bench stated, "Temple lands are not commercial assets of the state. They are sacred endowments made by generations of devotees with a definite object to sustain religious worship and charitable services." The judges further observed that if endowed properties continue to diminish year after year, it reflects a systemic erosion rather than a mere clerical anomaly.
Encroachment Details and Political Interference
The court took serious note of a report submitted by the Karur district superintendent of police, which detailed the challenges faced during eviction attempts. According to the report, when officials, with police protection, tried to carry out the eviction process on various occasions in 2025, they were met with protests led by the sitting MP, political leaders, and other demonstrators, preventing the execution of court orders.
Upon verification, the court discovered that among the encroachers, 27 were government officers, 49 were industrialists, and 38 were individuals wielding considerable influence. The judges remarked, "The poor deity has no voting right. On the other hand, the mighty encroachers have valuable votes. A deity, recognised as a juristic person in law, cannot be left remediless because it does not participate in elections. The deity may not vote, but the Constitution speaks."
Court's Directions and Emphasis on Rule of Law
The bench, while recording a clear finding of wilful contempt, exercised restraint in imposing punishment on the contemnors. This decision was made not out of indulgence but in pursuit of the larger public and religious interests at stake. The court directed that civil courts handling suits related to the temple lands should strive to dispose of them as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months. Additionally, where interim protection is declined, such suits must be taken up for early final disposal.
The Madras High Court also issued a set of specific directions to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) department and the Karur district superintendent of police. The judges emphasized that the state machinery is expected to act with firmness and constitutional fidelity. They underscored that when judicial orders are stalled by organized resistance, the rule of law itself is put to the test, and the court is exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction to protect the interests of the deity and the public.
With these directives, the court closed the contempt petition, reiterating the importance of upholding the sanctity of temple properties and ensuring that legal remedies are accessible to all, regardless of political influence or voting power.
