Temple Can't Deny Entry Based On Caste: Madras High Court
In a significant ruling affirming the principle of equality, the Madras High Court has directed the Ariyalur Superintendent of Police (SP) to ensure that Scheduled Caste (SC) individuals are not denied entry into the Puthukudu Ayyanar Temple.
The court emphatically stated that there can be "no caste discrimination in a country governed by the rule of law."
The directive, issued on a petition filed by A. Venkatesan, a Scheduled Caste resident, mandates that the SP and the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) ensure people of all castes are permitted to enter the temple at all times.
The court also instructed officials to take appropriate action against anyone found preventing any section of the community from entering the shrine.
Venkatesan had moved the court alleging denial of temple entry by a dominant community, a practice he sought to end, also praying for participation in the temple's upcoming consecration ceremonies from July 16 to 31.
The court highlighted the historical context, noting that the Temple Entry Authorisation Act of 1947 was enacted after a long struggle by many leaders to ensure access for all.
The Puthukudu Ayyanar Temple, historically accessible to all castes, saw a change in 2019 when a dominant group reportedly took control and decided to build a new temple. Despite contributions from Scheduled Caste residents, they were subsequently prevented from entering.
Disturbingly, the dominant group is alleged to have removed and demolished statues and stone structures erected by the Scheduled Caste community, including a large Ayyanar statue that was reportedly dumped in a well. An iron gate was then erected, forcing Scheduled Castes to worship from outside.
Despite these clear acts of discrimination, officials had reportedly not intervened, citing fears of law and order issues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
BJP government in UP fundamentally against education, democratic rights: Akhilesh Yadav
LUCKNOW: Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav on Tuesday launched a fierce attack on the BJP government in Uttar Pradesh, accusing it of being fundamentally against education and democratic rights. Addressing the media at the Janeshwar Mishra Park here, Yadav criticised the state government's recent actions targeting the SP's 'PDA Pathshala' campaign, where volunteers have been conducting informal classes in areas where primary schools were recently "shut or merged." Calling the BJP "the biggest mafia for being against education," Yadav said even the British never filed FIRs for running educational initiatives. The former Uttar Pradesh chief minister also condemned the filing of police cases against PDA Pathshala volunteers and asserted that such classes would continue until the government reopens the shut schools and appoints teachers and principals. "This is not going to stop because of police threats," Yadav said. He demanded the complete rollback of the school merger plan and the immediate reopening of closed primary schools. Yadav pointed out that when the Samajwadi Party was in power, it set up new schools and launched innovative education models, including cultural schools in the state capital. He accused the BJP of failing to support or sustain the initiative. Citing the recent roof collapse incident at a school in the chief minister's home district that left students injured, Yadav said the "poor" condition of schools highlights the government's neglect. The SP leader also targeted the state's Panchayati Raj Department for allegedly issuing a controversial letter that selectively focused on specific castes and communities.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Madras University journalism department examination row: High Court orders a thorough internal inquiry
The Madras High Court on Tuesday (August 5, 2025) directed University of Madras to initiate a thorough internal inquiry regarding the head of the department of journalism and communication having conducted an unauthorised examination for a group of students with the hope of obtaining post facto approval from the Dean (Academics). Justice C. Kumarappan issued the direction while dismissing a writ petition filed by one of the students R. Amanda Miriam Fernandez who had sought a direction to the university administration to declare the results of the examination in 'History of Communication' paper conducted for her and six others on May 11, 2024. Expressing serious concern over a head of the department of the university having conducted an examination without prior approval from the competent authorities, the judge wrote: 'If such a thing is let lightly, the sanctity of the university's examination would be put at grave risk.' When the writ petition was heard in April 2025, the university counsel V. Sudha contended that no examination in 'History of Communication' paper was conducted for the seven students, lacking attendance, on May 11, 2024. She also accused the petitioner of having produced a fake question paper in court. Such submission forced Justice N. Mala to appoint designated senior counsel A.K. Sriram to inquire as to whether an examination was conducted on May 11, 2024 or not. After a thorough inquiry, the senior counsel confirmed that an examination was indeed conducted on that day by the HoD (in-charge) T.R. Gopalakrishnan. However, going through the inquiry report, Justice Kumarappan found Mr. Gopalakrishnan to have told the senior counsel that only a 'mock exam' was conducted on May 11, 2024. The HoD also said that it was conducted in the interest of the students but unfortunately, the competent authorities did not approve the examination. 'Therefore, the question of conduct of examination is not the issue now, but the real issue rests upon as to whether such examination was authorized by the university or not? In the case in hand, from the narration of the above detailed discussion, it is amply clear that there was no approved examination conducted and the HOD has attempted to conduct examination with a probable hope that he would get concurrence from the academic committee,' Justice Kumarappan said. He went on to state: 'Ultimately, he (HoD) himself had stated that such concurrence was not given by the Academic Committee... Therefore, this court is of the firm view that the university did not conduct any exam as contended by the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner cannot have any relief from this court.'
New Indian Express
3 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Mulayam Singh's Kothi No. 4 in Moradabad to be reclaimed by UP govt
They feel that taking it away now was a calculated move by the Yogi government to weaken the morale of Samajwadis and erase their roots from western UP. The infamous incident of police firing on activists demanding a separate Uttarakhand state at Rampur Tiraha in Muzaffarnagar on October 1–2, 1994, killing half a dozen people, had turned Kothi number 4 into a crisis centre where emergency meetings were held and strategies were devised to placate the party supporters who were deeply shaken by the incident. Local SP leaders and workers feel that the district administration's move has come as a jolt, particularly at a time when the party is preparing for the upcoming political battles in the state. They say that it is not merely about the rules. The BJP knows the symbolic importance of this Kothi for Samajwadis in western UP. By taking it away, they want to send a message and weaken the morale of party workers. It is a deliberate attempt to shake the confidence of the cadre. On the contrary, the district administration cited three key reasons for the cancellation, stating that the allotment was in the name of Mulayam Singh Yadav, who passed away on October 10, 2022, and no transfer request was made thereafter. Also, the property lies on Nazul land, officially recorded as government property under the Moradabad Municipal Corporation, which needs it for officers' residences and official projects. Additionally, the SP has not been regular in paying the rent in recent years. The loss of Kothi No. 4 means SP will now have to find a new district office — a challenge both logistically and symbolically.
