MADURAI: Slamming the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) department for excluding the names of the board of trustees of Meenakshi Sundareswarar temple in its consecration invite, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the authorities to mention the trustees' names in the commemorative plaque which would be installed after the ceremony. This should be done so that there are 'no unnecessary complaints or politicking in the religious affairs', the court added.
Justice C Saravanan gave the direction on Wednesday, while disposing of a petition filed by one of the five trustees of the temple, D Subbulakshmi, alleging deletion of the trustees' names from the invite.
The judge criticised the executive officer for deviating from the past and existing practice of printing the names of the trustees in invitations prepared for consecrations and other religious events of the temple.
He referred to Rule 14 of the Functioning of the Board of Trustees Rules, which stated that all matters relating to the administration of the religious institution shall be decided at the meetings of the Board of Trustees. The Executive Officer (EO) or the Chairman of the Board of Trustees shall carry into effect the decisions of the Board of Trustees after obtaining the orders of the competent authority on individual subjects, he noted.
Therefore, it was incumbent on the EO to either inform the board or get approval from the competent authority regarding the invitation. However, the EO has acted beyond the scope of powers vested in him and has unnecessarily precipitated the issue, the judge said.
However, he noted that things are beyond redemption at this stage as the authorities have already printed and distributed 3,000 invitations and the rituals for the consecration would commence on September 6. The above is the only direction that can be issued, the judge added, and gave the above direction.
Earlier, the additional advocate generals PV Balasubramaniam and J Barathan contended that there is no statutory rule on the above matter. They also argued that there is no question of exclusion or interference in duties as claimed by the petitioner. The existing board of trustees has passed 570 resolutions since January, of which 312 pertain to the renovation works alone, and all these decisions have been implemented, they added. The counsel representing the EO also denied the allegations of 'deletion', saying there was no pro forma and the format for the invitation was never discussed in any of the board's meetings.
