MANICKA SUNDARA BHATTAR Vs. RSNAYUDU, EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND TRUSTEE OF SRI MINAKSHI SUNDARESWARAR DEVASTANAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main question in this appeal is whether the Provincial Legislature had power to pass the Madras Temple Entry Authorization and Indemnity Act, 1939, the object of which was to throw open the Hindu temples of the Province for the purpose of worship to all Hindus who by custom or usage had previously been excluded from entry therein. The Courts below have held that the Act is intra vires the Provincial Legislature. For reasons which we shall in due course state we consider that this decision is right.

(2.) The suit which has given rise to the appeal was filed on the 13 July, 1939, some two months before the Act came into force. At the time of the institution of the suit there were six plaintiffs and ten defendants.. The first defendant was the executive officer of the Sri Minakshi Sundareswarar Devasthanam at Madura, one of the famous temples of South India. Defendants 2 to 7 were described as members of " the prohibited or scheduled classes," by which was meant that they were persons who were not entitled to enter the temple or its precincts. It was alleged that on the 8 July, 1939, defendants 2 to 7 were received by the first defendant at the entrance to the temple and were marched into the temple by the eighth and ninth defendants. The tenth defendant, who was a temple Bhattar, was present and he was directed to perform puja for the party, which he did at the shrines of Sri Vinayakar, Sri Subramanya and Sri Minakshi. The plaintiffs regarded this as a desecration of the temple and asked inter alia for the following reliefs: (1) That the first defendant as the trustee of the temple be directed to cause purification ceremonies to be carried out; (2) that the first, eighth and ninth defendants be restrained by permanent injunction from taking into the temple defendants 2 to 7 or any other member of the prohibited or scheduled classes; (3) that defendants 2 to 7 be restrained by permanent injunction from entering the temple; and (4) that the defendants be directed to deposit into Court Rs. 3,100 for the cost of the performance of the purification ceremonies.

(3.) That non-caste Hindus had been debarred from entering the temple is common ground and the invasion of the temple by defendants 2 to 7 on the 8th July, 1939, is not disputed.