Simhachalam Temple Priest Promotion Sparks Legal Battle
The historic Simhachalam Temple in Visakhapatnam has become the center of a major controversy involving priest promotions that has now reached the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The dispute emerged when senior priest Srinivasa Prasadacharyulu challenged the temple management's decision regarding the appointment to the prestigious main priest position.
Court Intervention and Temple Management's Response
The legal battle intensified when Prasadacharyulu filed a petition in the High Court after being denied the main priest post despite serving as in-charge main priest. The court, on September 18 this year, directed the temple management to strictly follow established norms and rules in promotions and take appropriate action on the petition.
However, despite the clear court order, the temple management failed to implement the directives, forcing the petitioner to escalate the matter to Endowment Department Commissioner Ramachandra Mohan. The commissioner subsequently instructed the in-charge executive officer and deputy director N Sujatha to submit a detailed report on the entire issue.
Violation of Traditional Promotion Practices
According to temple traditions, the assistant main priest should naturally be promoted to the main priest's position. However, Prasadacharyulu alleged that while he was kept as in-charge, two assistant main priests—Godavarthi Srinivasacharyulu and I V Ramanacharyulu—were directly promoted on September 18, 2022, bypassing the established hierarchy.
The controversy deepened with Prasadacharyulu's additional allegation that one of the promoted priests had traveled abroad multiple times, which should make him ineligible for promotion as per AP Dharmik Parishad norms. Despite this violation, the then executive officer proceeded with the promotion. Tragically, one of the main priests involved in the dispute, Ramanacharyulu, has since passed away.
Potential Contempt of Court Charges
The temple management's continued failure to implement the High Court order could now amount to contempt of court. When questioned about the delay, in-charge EO N Sujatha cited health issues as the reason for not being able to focus on the court order earlier. She has now assured that she is sending the required report to the Endowment Commissioner and will take proper action on the issue as directed by the court.
The ongoing tussle has drawn widespread attention to the administration practices of one of Andhra Pradesh's most prominent temples, raising questions about transparency and adherence to established religious protocols in temple management.
