Court’s decision
The Madras High Court issued a decisive and emphatic order directing the district administration to ensure that the annual temple car procession is taken through the Scheduled Caste residential area, rejecting the objections raised by certain caste groups and Allah. The Court held that exclusion of the Dalit colony from the temple festival route violates constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity, and non-discrimination under Articles 14, 15, 17 and 25. The Court emphasised that religious customs cannot sanctify discrimination, observing that “God never discriminates, and the State cannot permit any discriminatory practice in His name.” Accordingly, the Court mandated full security, administrative supervision, and compliance with its directions.
Facts
The petitioner, a resident of the Scheduled Caste colony, approached the Court seeking a writ directing the authorities to include the Dalit street in the route of the annual temple car procession. Historically, the procession passed through the village but excluded the petitioner’s community area. Repeated representations to the district authorities yielded no result, prompting the petitioner to seek judicial intervention. The local administration cited tension between caste groups and expressed apprehension that including the Dalit colony might lead to law-and-order issues. The petitioner asserted that this exclusion had no religious basis and was purely caste-motivated, causing humiliation and violating the community’s fundamental rights.
Issues
The central issues before the Madras High Court were:
- Whether exclusion of the Scheduled Caste colony from a public temple car procession violates Articles 14, 15, 17, 21, and 25.
- Whether the district administration can deny religious access on the basis of anticipated law-and-order problems instigated by dominant caste groups.
- Whether temple administration and State authorities are constitutionally obligated to ensure caste-neutral religious access.
- Whether the Court can intervene in matters relating to religious processions when the grievance concerns discrimination and social exclusion.
Petitioner’s arguments
The petitioner argued that the temple car procession is a public religious function open to all Hindus, and exclusion of the Dalit colony is a manifestation of entrenched caste discrimination prohibited under Articles 14, 15(2), and 17. He submitted that the procession had passed through the colony in earlier decades, proving that the exclusion has no religious basis. He emphasised that anticipated unrest created by dominant caste groups cannot be a ground to curtail fundamental rights. He highlighted decisions where Courts held that caste-based obstruction to temple entry and participation constitutes untouchability. He urged the Court to direct the officials to provide adequate protection and ensure an inclusive route.
Respondent’s arguments
The district authorities expressed concern that including the colony might provoke caste tensions. They argued that dominant groups threatened to oppose the inclusion, and logistical challenges existed in accommodating the temple car through certain narrow streets. They submitted that their decision aimed at preserving public order, not discrimination, and that safety considerations justified the route chosen. The temple administration echoed similar concerns, contending that altering the route could disrupt long-established practice. They maintained that the colony’s exclusion was not intentional but unavoidable due to the sensitive situation created by opposing caste factions.
Analysis of the law
The Madras High Court held that the case squarely implicated constitutional provisions guaranteeing equality, nondiscrimination, and access to religious institutions. Article 15(2) explicitly prohibits denial of access to public places, including places of public worship, on grounds of caste. Article 17 abolishes untouchability “in all forms,” which includes direct and indirect social exclusion. The Court rejected the respondents’ reliance on law-and-order concerns, holding that the State cannot justify discrimination by pointing to the threat posed by dominant groups. The Court noted that narrow streets or practical obstacles cannot override constitutional mandates, especially when State support and adequate police protection can resolve such issues.
Precedent analysis
The Court relied on earlier decisions where Courts held that caste-based exclusion from religious activities constitutes a form of untouchability. The Court referred to Supreme Court jurisprudence emphasising that public order concerns cannot defeat constitutional rights and that State authorities must act to prevent disruptive elements rather than restrict lawful activities of marginalised groups. The Court also examined Madras High Court decisions where similar caste-based obstructions to temple entry were struck down and where the Court directed inclusive participation despite resistance from dominant communities.
Court’s reasoning
The Madras High Court observed that the State’s duty is to uphold constitutional rights, not yield to caste-based pressure groups. It reasoned that when a religious procession is public in nature, it must be accessible to every section of society, and exclusion of a Scheduled Caste locality cannot be justified on any ground. The Court strongly criticised the administrative hesitation, noting that the fear of disturbance should be addressed through preventive measures rather than by perpetuating discriminatory practices. The Court found that the petitioner’s grievance was genuine, the exclusion was unconstitutional, and the administration’s stance was inconsistent with equality jurisprudence.
Conclusion
The Madras High Court allowed the petition and directed that the temple car procession must mandatorily pass through the Scheduled Caste colony. It ordered the district administration and police to provide all necessary protection to ensure peaceful and inclusive conduct of the festivities. The Court reiterated that caste-based discrimination in public religious functions violates the Constitution and cannot be tolerated. All authorities were instructed to comply strictly with the order, and the matter was disposed of with these directions.
Implications
This judgment has significant implications for temple administration across Tamil Nadu and India. It affirms that religious traditions cannot be weaponised to exclude marginalised communities. It strengthens the constitutional position that equality in religious access is a fundamental right, not a concession. It also places responsibility on district officials to counter caste-based resistance rather than accommodate it. Going forward, this ruling will act as a legal shield for Scheduled Caste communities seeking equal participation in temple rituals and festivals, reinforcing Article 17’s mandate to eradicate untouchability in all social and cultural spheres.