Kerala High Court Underscores Head-Priest's Authority In Temple's 'Spiritual' Affairs, Seeks Expert Report On Sree Padmanabhaswamy Idol
In petitions concerning alleged defects in the Moolavigraha (principal idol) of Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple, the Kerala High Court underscored that matters relating to the temple's spiritual domain fall within the authority of the Thantri (head priest), who enjoys the status of “father of the deity”. A division bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M B Snehalatha recorded...
In petitions concerning alleged defects in the Moolavigraha (principal idol) of Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple, the Kerala High Court underscored that matters relating to the temple's spiritual domain fall within the authority of the Thantri (head priest), who enjoys the status of “father of the deity”.
A division bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M B Snehalatha recorded at the outset that the proceedings could not be treated as adversarial, given the sensitive religious and spiritual context.
It said,
"The assertion on one side is that there are defects to the “Moolavigraha” of the Temple; while on the other, it is stated that they have been rectified, or are in the process of being rectified. We have no doubt that in spiritual matters of the Temple - in contradistinction to the temporal matters - it is the opinion of the Thantri which is acme because he enjoys the status of father of the deity"
The standing counsel for the Administrative Committee, R. Suraj Kumar, informed the Court that an Expert Committee had been constituted in compliance with directions of the Supreme Court. However, the Bench observed that neither the Expert Committee's report nor an adequate action-taken statement was available before it.
While a note from the Thantri had been placed on record as Ext.R3(3), the Court found it insufficient and said:
"Though a Note by the Thantri, is available, we are of the firm view that it may not be sufficient because, as we have said above, this case would revolve around the opinion and the impressions of the Thantri, more than anybody else"
The bench further said that while "Executive Committee or the Administrative Committee, as the case may be" may have a say in temporal matters of the Temple, but when it comes to the spiritual matters, "precedence" may have to be given to the "Thantri's opinion".
"We have no doubt, therefore, that our interaction in this case will have to be direct with him, which we will do in due course," the bench added.
Adjourning the matter to September 11, the high court directs Administrative Committee to place on record the Expert Committee Report, a detailed note from the Thantri on actions taken or to be taken, and an action taken report by the Committee in consonance with the Thantri's opinion and directions.
In its closing observation, the Bench remarked:
"We close this order under the hortative hope that all the stakeholders understand that while dealing with such matters, what is relevant is not controversy, but the concerted belief and wishes of the millions of people who have their conscience focused on the idol. The cosmic power generated is beyond description, and it is the responsibility of every generation to ensure that the same is maintained, to be handed over to the next. This is what we want the Committees to ensure, but without interfering with the spiritual activities, which shall be controlled, in the normal course, by the Thantri and other spiritual experts".
Case Title: R Rajasekharan Pillai v State of Kerala and Anr
Case No: WP(C) 7039/ 2025
Counsel for Petitioner: M Balagovindan, Mini Gangadharan, T K Ananda Padmanabhan
Counsel for the Respondent : R Surak Kumar (SC-Administrative Committee)