- Muralitharan Kasi Viswanathan
- BBC Tamil
File photo
Chidambaram Natarajar Temple Dikshitars are protesting against the Department of the Treasury’s investigation into the accounts of the temple. They claim that the Treasury Department cannot impose restrictions on the temple. Why does the conflict between Thillai Kovil and the Trust Department continue?
When officials from the Department of Hindu Religious Affairs went to inspect the accounts of the famous Natarajar Temple in Chidambaram on June 7, the Dikshits there refused to show them the accounts. Nevertheless, the Department of the Treasury attempted to conduct the study on the second day, June 8th. The Dikshits, however, did not allow it.
The Department of the Treasury says it will definitely conduct research. But this temple was under the control of the Dikshits; Dixit says the Treasury Department does not have the authority to investigate.
If the Vaishnavism refers to the ‘temple’ as it refers to the Thiruvarangam Ranganathaswamy temple, the Saivars refer to the Chidambaram Natarajar temple as the ‘temple’. This is a temple sung by four vegans, Uppar, Sundarar, Sambandar and Manikkavaskar.
The temple was not built at the same time, but was built by different kings at different times and has reached its present state. Thevara songs were kept locked in this temple and are said to have been recovered during the reign of Rajaraja Chola.
As for the Chidambaram temple, each side tells of each period when the control of that temple came under the Dikshitars. Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. However, some who point out that the word “Dikshitars” are not mentioned in the scriptures or in the Sangam literature, refuse to accept the notion that the ‘Thillai Vazh Anandans’ are the ancestors of these Dikshitars.
Besides, various accounts are presented as to when the temple came under the control of the Dikshitars.
However, the Diocesans have long sued and won many cases over their authority over the temple. Let us now look at a brief history of this.
Who manages the Thillai Temple? – Continuing conflict
Officials who came to inspect the temple on June 7
When the law was introduced by the Prime Minister of Chennai, Pangal Raja, in the 1920s regarding the Hindu Charities, the Dikshits did not accept it. They approached the British Governor of Chennai and asked him to declare that the law did not apply to them. However, the English government did not fully accept this request. He said that sections like submission of budgets and planning for managing the temple would apply.
After this, some people asked the Trust Board to come up with a plan to run the temple. Accordingly the Trust Board devised a plan. But the Dikshits did not accept the plan. The case was filed in the Southern District Magistrate’s Court. In this, the Southern Court ruled in 1937 and ordered to accept the plan made by the Trust Board with some changes.
An appeal was lodged on behalf of the Dikshits against this. On appeal, it was ruled that the temple was not a private temple but a public temple. Further, the court ruled that the plan was necessary for the administration even though there was no malpractice in the management of the temple and asked the court to make some changes in the previous plan and accept it.
While the case was pending, the government took over the administration of the temple. But, the court did not accept it. It ruled that the state should not take over the administration unless there was a very bad administration. The verdict was handed down in April 1939. A detailed plan for the management of the temple was given in this judgment.
What is the Dikshitars’ argument?
File photo
This was followed in 1951 by the enactment of the new Hindu Temples Department Act. Subsequently, a new government was issued in August of that year to take over the administration of the temple. The government also announced the appointment of a new executive officer. The Dikshits approached the court against this.
“The Dikshits are a separate religious sect. They are smart Brahmins. No one other than the Dikshits can engage in administration or worship. This personal right of the Dikshits has been recognized for centuries. This right is eroded by the appointment of an executive. Argued.
In this case, the Chennai High Court ruled in favor of Dixit. In a judgment issued in December 1951, Chidambaram said, “It is not right that Chidambaram should appoint an executive officer for the temple. There is already a plan for the administration of the temple. It has also been finalized by the court. The order should be quashed, “the apex court ruled.
The Tamil Nadu government appealed to the Supreme Court against it. But suddenly the government withdrew. Thus, that appeal was dismissed.
Are the Dikshits a separate sect?
Many years later, in 1982, the then Commissioner U.S. Subramaniam said there were various irregularities in the temple and questioned why an executive officer should not be appointed. Against this, the Dikshits went to court. In July 1987 a new executive officer was appointed.
The Dikshits filed a petition against this. In this case, however, the case was dismissed for failing to do so despite the opportunity to appeal to the Secretary of the Department. Following this, Dixit appealed to the Secretary of the Department in 2004.
The appeal was rejected by an ordinance issued in 2006. The Dikshits appealed to the High Court against this. The petition was dismissed by Judge Banumati in 2009. In that judgment, the question was also raised as to whether the Dikshits were a separate sect.
However, this was not accepted by the Dikshits. They appealed to a two-judge bench in 1951, claiming that there was a ‘Res Judicata’ to discuss the matter, even though the Supreme Court had recognized them as sects. That session also ruled against the Dikshits. The judges, who examined Article 26 of the Constitution, ruled that the management of property should be lawful, except for the right to worship. Dixit’s appeal was dismissed.
Meanwhile, an executive officer was appointed to the temple. The temple administration came under the executive officer. The three parties appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court dismissing their case. Three petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of Dixit, one in support of Dixit and one of the leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party, Subramanian Swamy.
Image source, Getty Images
The petitions were heard together by the Supreme Court. The case was adjudicated on January 6, 2014. The verdict was in favor of the Dikshits. After the Supreme Court ruled in 1951 that the Dikshits were a separate sect, the Supreme Court ruled that the lower court could not hear it.
The apex court ruled that “if there are faults in the management of the temple, it should be handed over to the right persons after the faults have been rectified by the government to rectify them. The Dikshits are currently managing the temple on the basis of this order.
The Diocese argues that the Temple Department should not inspect the temple on the basis of the above 1951 judgment and the 2014 Supreme Court judgment.
When asked by Dixit’s advocate Chandrasekhar about the Hindu Temples Department’s refusal to allow officials, he said the Temples Department was not allowed to inspect the temple as per the Supreme Court ruling. “According to the Supreme Court judgment dated January 6, 2014, the Dikshits are recognized as a separate religious denomination. Therefore, under Article 26 of the Constitution, the Dikshits have all the protections of religion,” he said.
However, when asked if the Department of the Treasury had permission to conduct an investigation if it received a report of a misconduct in accordance with the 2014 ruling, he said, “This is nonsense. We have explained to them 14 pages why it does not apply. However, they say they will investigate without accepting it.” They say let’s solve.
Even before such a study comes out, the media is informed about it. Misconceptions about Dikshits are being spread. They say we will not take over the temple. If so, it should be brought to a resolution in the legislature.
They issue a decree to allow devotees to stand and sing in the Kanaka Sabha and urge it to be implemented immediately. Misconceptions are being spread about Dixit with contempt. This is encouraged by the government. We have a sense of dread, “he said.
When asked about this, Ashok Kumar, the Joint Commissioner of the Department of Hindu Religious Affairs, said, “They refuse to show accounts. They cannot deny that. We will take further legal action.”
Controversies and lawsuits are not new to the Thillai Natarajar Temple. While both sides are adamant in their position, the issue does not seem to be resolved for now.
BBC Tamil on social media: