Madras HC Refuses Equal Tamil Hymns Writ, Meenakshi Temple

Writ Court Cannot Make Law: Madras High Court Refuses to Order Equal Tamil Hymns at Meenakshi Temple Kudamuzhukku

Published: 13 September 2026 · NyayVidhan

The Madras High Court dismissed two writ petitions on the Kudamuzhukku (Kumbabishekam) of Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple, Madurai, fixed for 17.09.2026 (para 120). A Tamil Velvi Asiriyar's plea to perform the sacred-fire rituals in Tamil could not be granted while the issue is sub judice before the Supreme Court, and equal recitation of Tamil hymns with Sanskrit could not be ordered without a law, since a writ court implements and declares the law and does not make it (para 120).

Key holdings

Whether a temple is built as per the Agamas is for the committee formed under the order of 22.08.2022 to decide (para 120).

Recitation of Tamil hymns is subject to the recommendation of the committee formed under the order of 19.08.2021 and to the Supreme Court's orders in the pending civil appeal (para 120).

A person who is not a temple employee cannot, without Rules, seek to recite hymns during the Velvi Kundam rituals, but may take part as a devotee (para 120).

Denying a qualified person the chance to chant Tamil hymns may possibly offend Article 14, but that must be tested in appropriate proceedings; opening such events to others is for the Legislature or the Executive (para 120).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

In W.P.(MD) No.12387 of 2026, D. Sureshbabu, who says he has performed Velvi Kunda Valipadu Poojai for more than two decades, challenged the Executive Officer's order of 11.03.2026, based on the Board of Trustees' Resolution No.176 of 27.02.2026, refusing to let his team perform the Velvi Kunda Nigalvugal in Tamil at par with the Sanskrit Yaga Kundams (paras 5-7, 12). In W.P.(MD) No.11386 of 2026, Tamil Rajendiran sought recitation of Tamil mantras and hymns equally with Sanskrit in the Yaga Saalai, Karuvarai and Gopura Vimaanam (para 2). The temple said it follows the Agamas and its usage, with Othuvars reciting the Panniru Thirumurai at a separate place (paras 25-29).

Court's Findings

The Court noted that a committee formed under the Division Bench order of 19.08.2021 in W.P.(MD) No.19115 of 2020 is examining Tamil hymns at consecrations, that another, formed under the First Bench order of 22.08.2022, is identifying temples built as per the Agamas, and that the Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No.7692 of 2023, has extended time for that exercise (paras 69-70, 76, 81, 83). No text had been cited showing that only Sivachariyars may officiate at this temple's Kudamuzhukku (para 61). Reviewing Articles 16(5), 25 and 26, it treated some observations in Seshammal as made in passing and noted N. Adithayan's view that a custom violating human rights cannot be a source of law (paras 92-118). It held that rituals in Agamic temples must follow the Agamas, but which temples are Agamic is for the committee (para 120). The Velvi Kundam relief could not be granted while the issue is sub judice, and a non-employee cannot seek it without Rules (para 120). Tamil recitation by Othuvars is already in practice, and equal recitation cannot be sought "unless there is a law by the Legislature or delegated Legislation" (para 120).

Legal Principle

A writ court implements and declares the law but does not make it. Without a law made by the Legislature or delegated legislation, it cannot direct equal recitation of Tamil hymns with Sanskrit at a temple consecration; rituals in temples built as per the Agamas must follow the Agamas (para 120).

Precedents Relied Upon

Seshammal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1972) 2 SCC 11
Explained Discussed at ¶ 26, 30, 102-117, 120
Scope of Articles 16(5), 25 and 26 and the Agamas in the appointment of Archakas; the Court treated some observations as made in passing, as the Supreme Court was concerned only with the validity of the H.R. & C.E. Act.
Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb v. The State of Bombay 1962 Supp 2 SCR 496
Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 100-102
Articles 25 and 26 protect rituals, observances, ceremonies and modes of worship integral to religion; what is an essential part of a religion is decided by the courts with reference to its doctrine.
N. Adithayan v. The Travancore Devasom Board & Ors. 2002 SCC OnLine SC 945
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 118
A custom or usage that violates human rights, dignity, social equality or the Constitution cannot be countenanced as a source of law.

View all precedents (7)

All India Adi Saiva Sivacharyargal Seva Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 4154
Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 35, 79-83, 119, 120
First Bench order of 22.08.2022 (W.P. No.17802 of 2021): a committee to identify temples constructed as per the Agamas; appointment of Archakas in such temples governed by the Agamas.
D. Ponnusamy (W.P.(MD) No.19115 of 2020) Order dated 19.08.2021, Division Bench, Madras High Court
Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 67-69, 83, 120
Direction to constitute a committee on Tamil hymns at Kudamuzhuku and for the State to decide when equal importance is given to Tamil; recitation of Tamil hymns is subject to that committee's recommendation.
Srirangam Koil Miras Kainkaryaparargal Matrum Athanai Sarntha Koilgalin Miraskainkaryaparargalin Nalasangam v. The State of Tamil Nadu Civil Appeal No.7692 of 2023 (pending, Supreme Court)
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 70, 76-78, 120
The Supreme Court is seized of the issue and has extended time for identifying Agamic temples; the Velvi Kundam relief therefore could not be granted at this stage.
Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2016) 2 SCC 725
Referred To Discussed at ¶ 34, 71
Cited by the Senior Counsel for the Sangam as following Seshammal.