Supreme Court Orders Status Quo On Appointment Of Archakas In Tamil Nadu Temples Governed By Agamic Traditions

It is the case of the petitioner association that in the impugned judgment dated August 22, 2022 the Madras High Court had erroneously decided on the question of transfer of Archakas from one Agamic Temple to another Agamic Temple. In the order a single judge bench had held that the appointment of Archakas in the temple or group of temples constructed under the respective Agama shall, accordingly, be governed by the Agamas and not by Rules 7 and 9 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020.

The plea also challenges two government orders and other consequential orders wherein in one order dated July 27, 2023 the State had directed that the Archakas who do not belong the particular denomination shall undergo one year training under Senior Archakas while also directed payment of stipend to the Archakas undergoing training. In the second order dated August 28, 2023 the State decided to provide training in the performance of Poojas and Rituals in the Temples governed by Agamas. It is also pertinent to note that on September 9, 2023 the State also issued an Advertisement to fill up the post of Archakas in a Temple governed Agamas.

A bench of Justice A.S Bopanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh while issuing notice in the matter noted, “In the meantime, the status quo relating to the Archakaship in the Agamic Temples in question, shall be continued in the same manner, until further orders are made herein”.

Senior Advocates Guru Krishna Kumar and P. Valliappan appeared for the petitioners, and AOR D. Kumanan appeared for the respondent.

In the present matter, it was the petitioners' case that the Rules of 2020 were framed ignoring the rituals and customs stipulated in the Agamas. According to the petitioners, the qualification given under the Rules of 2020 cannot apply for the post of Archaka/Poojari to be appointed in the temples, where construction, installation of idols and worship of deity is as per Agamas.

The petitioner association inter alia raised certain grounds in the plea:

-because the ancient Saivite and Vaishnavite Temples in Tamil Nadu are governed by the Agamas;

-because, the Agamas mandates only a person (Archaka) from a particular Sect/Denomination for being appointed as Archakas and to perform the various Poojas/Rituals/Ceremonies etc. as prescribed under the said Agamas governing the Temple;

-because the performance of Poojas in ancient Temples of Tamil Nadu stand on a different footing, compared to rest of India. In rest of India, any worshipper can touch the idol, whereas in Tamil Nadu, even a Pontiff of a Mutt or a Sankaracharya or a great sage cannot touch the idol or perform Poojas in Agamic Temples. Such is the sanctity observed in the Agamic Temples of Tamil Nadu. Any violation of Agarnas is believed to defile the images of Gods and bring misfortune to the devotees;

-because out of about 38,000 Temples in the State of Tamil Nadu, merely about 3,600 Temples, which are in existence for over thousand years, are governed strictly by the Agamas and traditions. In the rest of the 35,000 Temples, the denominations, referred to above, do not have any right to perfom Poojas.

It was also contended that the prescription of qualification of one year certificate course for Archaka/Poojari was an assault on the rights of the Sivachariyars. The Petitioner also challenged the provision which allowed for the appointments for the post of Archaka/Poojari by Fit Person. The petitioner's emphasised that such appointments should be made only by the trustees.

Therefore, in the matter earlier, a Bench comprising CJ Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N. Mala of the Madras High Court had directed the State Government to constitute a Five-Member Committee, including therein Justice M. Chockalingam, Retired Judge of the Madras High Court, with N.Gopalaswami, Head of the Madras Sanskrit College's Executive Committee, to identify the temples which were constructed as per Agamas.

The Court in the impugned judgment had also expressed that in case any appointment of Archaka is made offending the Agamas, then the individual aggrieved person can challenge such appointment before the High Court. However, the Court clarified that the appointment of Archaka would be made by the trustees or a fit person and not by the HR & CE Department.

The judgment further held that transfer of the Archakas would not be permissible unless it is a case of transfer of Archaka of the temple governed by a particular Agama to a temple governed by the same Agama. The Bench was dealing with a batch of writ petitions challenging the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions Employees (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2020 introduced by the state government.

On the challenge being made to the authority of the Fit Person to appoint Archakas, the High Court had thus observed, "We do not find that the definition of the term "appointing authority" is in any manner offending the constitutional provisions or even the provisions of the Act of 1959. It is no doubt true that the right to make appointment of the Archakas lies with the trustees, but this court cannot be oblivious to the fact that in the absence of the trustees, the affairs of the temple have to be looked after by someone. Only in the absence of trustees or for any reason given in Section 49 of the Act of 1959, a fit person is appointed to exercise the power of trustees".

Cause Title: Srirangam Koil Miras Kainkaryaparagal Matrum Athanai Sarntha Koilgalin Miraskainkaryaparargalin Nalasangam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Order