The Madras High Court was approached through writ petitions challenging caste-based discrimination at a temple in a district. The petitioners sought directions to quash the impugned orders that excluded Scheduled Caste devotees from worship and prayed for the temple to be opened for all without any discrimination, ensuring adequate police protection during worship.
The case arose from the prolonged closure of the temple due to caste-based exclusion of Scheduled Caste devotees. Despite constitutional guarantees and historical legal reforms empowering temple entry rights, the temple remained inaccessible to these devotees. The failure of district officials to uphold these rights and maintain law and order allowed discrimination to continue unabated.
The petitioners contended that the exclusion of Scheduled Caste devotees from the temple violated their fundamental constitutional rights to equality, freedom of religion, and the prohibition of untouchability. They urged the court to direct the reopening of the temple and enforcement of police protection to ensure uninterrupted worship. The respondents argued that their actions were based on maintaining law and order and preventing public disturbance, citing administrative discretion in a sensitive social context.
The Court observed that caste-based denial of temple entry constitutes a grave violation of constitutional rights. It condemned the authorities for failing to uphold these rights and allowing discrimination to persist under the guise of maintaining public order. The Court reiterated that constitutional guarantees cannot be compromised by administrative fears and emphasized the need for strict enforcement of laws protecting Scheduled Castes. It directed the prosecution of those obstructing constitutional rights under relevant statutes.
The Court disposed of the writ petitions with clear directions to reopen the temple without any caste-based discrimination and to provide police protection for ensuring peaceful worship. Relevant authorities were ordered to comply strictly with constitutional mandates and the Court’s directions, maintaining oversight to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights.
Case Title: Vanniyakulachathiriyar Nala Arakattalai v. The District Collector and Others
Case No.: WP (MD) Nos. 15950 of 2024 and 17212 of 2025
Coram: Justice B. Pugalendhi
Counsel for the Petitioner: Adv. C. Vakeeswaran and Adv. S. Gokulraj
Counsel for the Respondents: Special Government Pleader F. Deepak, Additional Public Prosecutor E. Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Government Pleader S. S. Madhavan, Adv. C. Vakeeswaran
Picture Source :
