Sivachariyars move Madras High Court against inclusion of member in committee to identify Agamic temples

The petitioners have alleged that former government employee M.P. Sathyavel Murugan, who is part of the committee, has an “erroneous opinion about Hindu traditions” and has been “spreading falsities” and say he is therefore, ineligible to be part of the committee

The Madras High Court on Wednesday stayed the operation of a communication sent by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department to retired judge, M. Chockalingam, on February 8, informing him about a government order issued on January 30 constituting a five-member committee headed by him to identify Agamic temples for the purpose of appointment of Archakas (priests).

Acting Chief Justice T. Raja and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy granted the interim stay for a period of four weeks on a public interest litigation petition filed by the All India Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Sangam.

The petitioner association had challenged the communication on the ground that a former government employee, M.P. Sathyavel Murugan should not have been made a member of the committee since he holds views adverse to the Sivachariyars.

In its affidavit, the association recalled that it was on August 22, 2022 that the first Division Bench comprising then Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N. Mala had held that government rules prescribing eligibility for appointment of priests would not apply to temples governed by 28 different Agama Sastras (treatise on temple rituals). The judges also ordered the constitution of a committee to ascertain Agamic temples.

Even before the constitution of the committee, the HR&CE Department began to circulate a questionnaire framed by Mr. Murugan to various temples for the purpose of collecting details regarding Agamic practices followed by them. Temple activist T.R. Ramesh filed a PIL petition against the circular issued by the HR&CE commissioner to all Regional Joint Commissioners on November 4, 2022 and obtained a stay on December 8, 2022.

In his affidavit, Mr. Ramesh had questioned the authority of Mr. Murugan to frame such a questionnaire and insisted that he should not be made a member of the committee. Even as his case was pending in court, the government had gone ahead with issuing the January 31 G.O. constituting the five-member committee and had also communicated the G.O. to Mr. Chockalingam who had been appointed as its chairman, the association said.

Alleging that Mr. Murugan had been spreading false narratives about Agama Sastras, the association said, he was a self-proclaimed critic of Vedas and Agamas. “He has his own erroneous opinion about Hindu traditions and has been going on spreading falsities over a period of time and maligning the Sivachariyars... He cannot be a part of the committee that would decide the fate of Sivachariyars,” its affidavit read.