After 22 years without a trustees’ board, Madras HC appoints interim board to oversee Divya Desam temple

The petitioner sought a direction requiring the Fit Person to conduct the temple’s forthcoming utsavams, rituals and processions according to Agama Sastras, established usage and customary practice until Kumbhabhishekam, and requiring the Executive Officer to facilitate them

He alleged that after a Balalayam relating only to the Dhwajasthambam on 23 August 2026, the September Pavitrotsavam and other regular observances were discontinued, with no date fixed for the corresponding Samprokshanam/Kumbhabhishekam

The respondents stated that applications had been invited to appoint non-hereditary trustees; the petitioner said that no Board of Trustees had been constituted since the Fit Person’s appointment in 2004

The Court directed the parties to furnish names for an interim board and, on considering those names, appointed an Interim Board of Trustees

Whether the Court should direct the temple authorities to conduct the forthcoming utsavams and related observances in accordance with the Agama Sastras, established usage and customary practice

Whether an Interim Board of Trustees should be constituted to manage the temple’s affairs pending the formation of a regular Board

The petition invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution

The order cites no specific statutory provision, precedent or Agama rule as the basis for its decision.

It proceeds on the case-specific view that, given the temple’s operating hours and the Fit Person’s inability to manage its affairs alone, an interim board was appropriate until the department formally reconstituted a regular Board of Trustees

The Court noted that the temple had been without a Board of Trustees since 2004 and considered it impracticable for a government-employed Fit Person alone to manage the temple comprehensively, particularly in light of the temple’s extended daily hours

As the department had begun the process of appointing non-hereditary trustees but a regular Board had not yet been formed, the Court constituted an Interim Board using names furnished by the parties

It left decisions on temple affairs—including utsavams, rituals and administration—to that Board rather than issuing a specific direction to conduct the scheduled Pavitrotsavam

It empowered the Interim Board to decide matters concerning temple affairs, including utsavams, rituals and administration, and disposed of the writ petition with those observations and directions, without costs; the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed