SC to hear Thiruchendur temple priest's plea on July 1 over consecration timing
The plea, filed by R. Sivarama Subramaniya Sasthrigal, contends that the High Court erred in allowing the ceremony to be conducted on July 7 between 6 a.m. and 6.47 a.m., as recommended by a court-appointed Agama expert committee.
The petitioner asserts that the auspicious time should be 12.05 p.m. to 12.47 p.m., as fixed by him in his capacity as Vidhayahar of the temple.
The matter was mentioned orally before a bench of Justice KV Viswanathan and Justice NK Singh for urgent listing. Justice Viswanathan, upon learning that the temple in question was Thiruchendur's famous Subramaniya Swamy Temple, remarked, 'It is a good temple.'
During the exchange, the judge asked if the petitioner had fixed the time last year as well, to which the counsel confirmed and added that even the High Court had previously recognized the Vidhayahar's authority in such matters.
However, this year, the counsel explained, the High Court had constituted a committee to determine the timing.
Justice Viswanathan, after examining the High Court's order on a digital device presented by counsel, noted that the High Court had specifically directed the temple administration to follow the traditional procedure of seeking written opinions from the Vidhayahar, with clear indication of whether a Pattolai (astrological chart/timing) is a draft or final version.
Despite this, the High Court, in its review judgment, upheld the expert committee's timing, which the petitioner has now challenged. The bench agreed to list the matter on July 1, but declined the petitioner's request for a hearing on June 26.
The petition stems from a Madurai bench judgment delivered by Justices S Srimathy and R Vijayakumar, which refused to interfere with the timing fixed by a five-member expert committee. The committee was appointed following an earlier petition by the Vidhayahar himself, who had opposed the authorities' selection of the early morning window as 'inauspicious.'
Ironically, the same Vidhayahar later questioned the very constitution of the expert committee through a review petition. The High Court, however, noted that it was compelled to form the committee only because the petitioner had issued three separate Pattolais, without clarifying whether the first two were draft versions.
'Had the Vidhayahar been careful and pointed out that the first two Pattolais were drafts and that a final version would follow after consulting the Panchangam, this confusion would not have arisen,' the division bench noted.
The High Court observed that both parties had consented to the formation of the committee at that time and that the majority decision of the experts could not now be revisited merely because it was unfavourable to the petitioner.
The High Court judgment emphasized that, The expert committee's recommendation for the 6:00 a.m. to 6:47 a.m. window was based on Agama principles.
The formation of the committee was 'peculiar to the facts of this case' and should not be treated as a precedent.
Until a civil court decides otherwise, the religious supremacy of the Vidhayahar over temple rituals must be preserved.
Going forward, the temple administration must seek written opinion from the Vidhayahar on consecration timings, with a clear label indicating whether it is a draft or final Pattolai.
Despite this recognition of the Vidhayahar's traditional role, the court upheld the July 7 morning ceremony timing, prompting the current appeal in the Supreme Court.
UNI SNG PRS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
4 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
After SC order, ailing elephant relocated from Kolhapur Math to Gujarat facility
PUNE: Following the Supreme Court's dismissal of a writ petition filed by the Kolhapur-based Jain Math challenging her relocation, 36-year-old elephant, Mahadevi alias Madhuri, was shifted to the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust run by Vantara in Jamnagar, Gujarat, late on Monday. The transfer was carried out under tight security and with the direct involvement of forest officials. After SC order, ailing elephant relocated from Kolhapur Math to Gujarat facility Earlier on July 16, the Bombay high court upheld the elephant's right to dignified treatment and specialised care. The apex court on Monday refused to stay the Bombay HC directive, taking note of the argument raised by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India that 'the sentiments of devotees cannot override the fundamental right of an animal to health and dignified care'. The official order is still awaited. Initially, the transfer plan met with opposition from the locals. When the Vantara team along with forest department officials arrived at the Kolhapur Math, some locals reportedly pelted stones in protest. The situation was diffused only after police intervention. After the initial tension, the crowd eventually bid Mahadevi an emotional farewell. 'She is expected to reach the Jamnagar facility by July 30,' confirmed a spokesperson for PETA India that argued for the elephant's transfer. Dhairyasheel Patil, deputy conservator of forests (DCF), Kolhapur, said, 'As per the court's directions, the forest department issued the necessary permissions and ensured a safe transfer. We had assessed Mahadevi's fitness for travel prior to the move.' Asked why Mahadevi is being sent to a Gujarat-based facility, Khushboo Gupta, director of advocacy projects, PETA India, said, 'The decision was taken by a high-powered committee (HPC) that includes a retired Supreme Court judge, elephant welfare experts, and senior forest officials from both the state and central governments. The decision is rooted in expert assessments of Mahadevi's physical and mental health.' According to official inspections, Mahadevi suffers from foot rot, overgrown toenails, arthritis, and stereotypic behaviour such as constant head bobbing which is a sign of psychological trauma due to long-term solitary captivity. The Vantara facility offers hydrotherapy, expert veterinary care, and socialisation with other elephants, which the HPC deemed essential for the elephant's recovery. 'She will no longer be kept in chains or subjected to weapons,' Gupta said. Mahadevi was reportedly brought from Karnataka to the Kolhapur Math in 1992 when she was around three years old. While the math claims she came from a Shivamogga village, PETA said that there is no proof of legal ownership or documentation of transfer. The Math authorities had applied for an ownership certificate from the Maharashtra forest department but it was never granted. The elephant first drew attention when she allegedly killed the chief priest of the Math in December 2017. Between 2012 and 2023, she was allegedly transported at least 13 times across Maharashtra for religious processions — including Muharram and Bonalu — without proper permission, in violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act. In October 2023, PETA filed a complaint before the HPC, citing violations under section 48A of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972 and the failure of the caretakers to ensure Mahadevi's welfare. After a year-long process involving inspections and hearings, the HPC ordered her transfer in June 2025. The Bombay high court upheld the order on July 16, directing the authorities to complete the relocation by July 30. The math filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court on July 22, challenging Mahadevi's relocation but the plea was rejected on July 28 clearing the decks for the elephant's transfer.
Time of India
17 hours ago
- Time of India
Govt permit brings cobras back to Battis Shirala after 23 years; activists report violations at Nagpanchami event
1 2 3 4 5 6 Kolhapur: Live snake displays returned to Battis Shirala on the occasion of Nagpanchami after a gap of nearly 23 years as govt employed an "educational purposes" workaround to a 2014 Supreme Court ban on capture, display and worship of the reptiles. In this Sangli district town, located 50km from here, 21 men handled live Indian cobras (Naja naja) on Tuesday after obtaining special permits. The permits, issued by Srinivasa Rao, the chief wildlife warden and principal chief conservator of forests, Nagpur, on Monday (July 28), allowed the capture of the cobras solely for educational purposes aimed at promoting traditional knowledge on snake conservation. The permits are given to 21 residents of Battis Shirala to capture the snakes over five days starting July 27, under Section 12 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and Maharashtra Wildlife Protection Rules, 2014. Each permit holder has paid Rs 1,427 to the forest department and is required to release the snakes back into their natural habitat without any mortality. However, despite the ministry of environment, forests and climate change's explicit stipulation that "no commercial or entertainment of any kind shall be permitted," animal rights activists reported some violations at the event. Sangli-based animal rights activist Koustubh Pol, who witnessed the Nagpanchami celebrations in Battis Shirala on Tuesday, criticised the event. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why are some Chinese youth calling themselves 'rat people', and what issues does it surface? CNA Read More Undo "Strangely, the permission was given on the eve of Nagpanchami, and yet almost a hundred Nag mandals had cobras on the morning of the festival. If all this is for an educational purpose, then why was the permit given only for Battis Shirala village? This looks pre-planned for political benefits. Though permission was given for 21 snakes, almost 100 Nag mandals took part in the celebrations with live cobras." Rahul Shinde, an ophiologist based in Solapur, argued that the display of snakes during the festival violated the Supreme Court order. "The permits were issued in haste. Those who are really into snake conservation efforts are punished for handling the snakes. At the same time, such permissions are granted. This is not okay. Did the authorities check whether the snakes are fed well and looked after before granting the permission? The snakes get stressed when they are surrounded by humans; they are cold-blooded animals and cannot withstand the high body temperature of humans. Also, ground vibrations due to the high-decibel sounds make snakes susceptible to strokes. They may ultimately die," he said. The TOI team visiting Battis Shirala also observed snakes being removed from pots and crowds dancing to high-decibel music. Informational posters were displayed only when snakes were taken out of the pots. Officials had expected the snakes to be showcased on platforms with informative boards in the background, with only the permit holders handling the snakes and providing oral information to the public. Jaysing Mahadik, forest ranger of the Shirala forest range, said, "The 21 mandals were given specific places to display one snake each and make people aware of the importance of the snake. The permission was given to do away with the misconceptions, which lead to the killing of snakes. We will gather all details on if the permit rules were violated after all teams sit together and will subsequently proceed with the action prescribed. " Bajrang Tukaram Kadam, a 35-year-old member of the Shri Ganesh Nagraj Mandal, adhered to the directives by explaining the ecological importance of snakes to visitors. "Snakes do not drink milk. They are friends of farmers. There are very few species that are venomous; however, due to fear and superstition, people tend to kill all snakes. Snakes are an important part of the ecosystem," he said. Battis Shirala had not displayed live cobras for 23 years before this year's event. The town is renowned for its long-standing tradition of worshipping live cobras during Nagpanchami. According to Siddharth Patil, a young resident, the community ensures that no snakes are harmed during the capture and worship process. "My father told me that experienced people associated with nag mandals used to go out after the Bendur festival, around two weeks before Nagpanchami, to catch the snakes. No snake was harmed. The snakes were nurtured, and after worship, they were released into their habitat. We consider the snake a god, and no one wants to harm snakes in any way," he said. Local residents, including women from the town's population of 35,000, consider cobras their brothers. Sadhana Naik, a resident, expressed gratitude towards govt for facilitating the worship, saying, "For us, the snakes are brothers. We thank govt for finding a way out to help us worship our brother." In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that capturing, displaying, or worshipping live snakes was not protected as a fundamental religious right and violated wildlife protection laws. Cobra and other venomous snakes such as Russell's viper, spectacled cobra, and monocled cobra are listed as Schedule I part C animal in the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, to ensure their conservation.
Time of India
18 hours ago
- Time of India
Only RDO can demarcate area for water conservancy, rules Kerala HC
Kochi: High court has held that the revenue divisional officer (RDO) is the competent authority to demarcate the area for water conservancy while considering applications for changing the nature of unnotified land exceeding 20.2 Ares. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In such cases, 10% of the applied land must be set apart for water conservancy measures, in accordance with Section 27A (2) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. Justice C S Dias issued the ruling in a petition by Chitranjan Thampan of Alappuzha, who sought a direction to RDO to consider his application for changing the nature of his property in the revenue records. The petitioner, who holds possession of 28.25 Ares of unnotified land, had applied to change the nature of only 25.42 Ares, excluding 10% of the total area for water conservancy as required under the Act. However, his application was rejected, prompting him to approach HC. The single bench observed that the power to demarcate the area for water conservancy is vested with the RDO. Although the applicant is required to submit a sketch showing the area proposed to be set apart for water conservancy, the RDO, based on reports from the village officer and agricultural officer, is the competent authority to demarcate and approve such an area. The applicant cannot unilaterally deduct 10% of the land and apply for the remainder. Accordingly, the court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh application along with a new sketch as stipulated under the Rules for changing the nature of the unnotified land.
