The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, on October 10, 2025, heard a contempt petition regarding non-compliance by an earlier court order filed by a devotee of the Arulmigu Balasubramaniyaswamy Temple. Justices P. Velmurugan and B. Pugalendhi issued further directions, noting that the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department had failed to comply with earlier orders and had made no substantial progress in reclaiming the temple lands.
The case arose after the petitioner who identified himself as a devotee alleged non-compliance with a 2019 court order which had directed HR and CE Department to remove encroachments from 507.88 acres of land belonging to the Arulmigu Balasubramaniaswamy Temple in Vennaimalai, Karur. But even after six years had passed, no meaningful action was taken where reports showed that eviction attempts in 2022 were obstructed by agitations from encroachers and poor coordination among police, revenue and fire service departments.The HR & CE Department later proposed to form a Monitoring Committee as constituted by Court order on September 23, 2024 but to no avail. Then on October 3, 2024, the Court suo motu impleaded senior HR & CE officials after finding continued delay and their claim that local authorities and police had failed to cooperate revealing that, several encroachers were influential persons, including government officials and industrialists abetted by the revenue officers.
The Court observed disobedience by the authorities with regard to the 2019 directions and condemned both the HR & CE Department and the District Administration for administrative lag and neglect of duty. It held the SP (Superintendent of Police) of Karur, and the District Collector responsible for ensuring enforcement and officer safety during eviction drives. Accordingly, the Court directed the SP to provide security to HR & CE officials warning of personal liability for any harm whereas, the HR & CE were ordered to submit a detailed list of encroachers, noting that 27 government officers, 49 industrialists, and 38 influential persons had illegally occupied temple land. The Commissioner of HR & CE was also criticized by the Court for failing to escalate the issue to higher authorities. The Court, finding the explanations unsatisfactory, impleaded the SP as Respondent No. 18 and directed all respondents (R-2 to R-18) to appear personally with the relevant land records before 10:30 a.m. on the next date of hearing, October 17, 2025. It further directed that the revenue officials must be present along with all revenue records, including the A-register pertaining to the subject properties, warning that any failure to comply would invite further contempt action.
Appearances:
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Radhakrishnan Party-in-person
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.P.Subburaj Special Government Pleader for R.1 to R.4 Mr.P.Athimoolapandan Standing Counsel for R.5 Mr.V.Chandrasekar for(R.9, R.13, R.14)Mr.K.Govindarajan for R.6 Mr.M.Saravanan for R.10
