Castes Are Anti-National: Madras High Court Quotes Ambedkar, Rejects Caste-Based Temple Trusteeship

Chennai – In a landmark ruling, the Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking to restrict the appointment of trustees for the Arulmigu Karaneeswarar Temple in Saidapet, Chennai, to members of a specific caste. The court, presided over by Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, emphasized that caste has no place in religious administration, reinforcing the constitutional vision of a casteless society. The judgment, delivered on April 29, 2025, in W.P.No.15257 of 2025, has been hailed as a significant step toward equality and social justice.

The petitioner, K.V. Venugopal, Secretary of the Karani Gramam Sengundar Sangam, challenged a notification issued by the Joint Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department on April 3, which invited applications from the general public for non-hereditary trustee positions at the temple. Venugopal argued that only members of the Sengunthar community, permanently residing in Saidapet, should be eligible to serve as trustees, citing a scheme decree from 1924. He further demanded that trustees be elected by members of the same caste, rather than nominated by the government.

In a strongly worded order, Justice Chakravarthy rejected the petition, declaring that caste-based restrictions on temple administration are unconstitutional and contrary to public policy.

Quoting Swami Vivekananda’s maxim, “The soul has neither sex nor caste nor imperfection,” the court underscored that all individuals are equal before God. The judge also drew on Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s warnings against caste as a divisive force and cited the Supreme Court’s observations in Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India (2008), which affirm the constitutional goal of a casteless society.

The court said, " Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his famous speech on 25th November, 1949, on conclusion of deliberations of the Constituent Assembly, stated; “In India there are castes. The castes are antinational. In the first place because they bring about separation in social life. They are anti- national also because they generate jealousy and antipathy between caste and caste. But we must overcome all these difficulties if we wish to become a nation in reality. For fraternity can be a fact only when there is a nation. Without fraternity, equality and liberty will be no deeper than coats of paint”.

The court referenced its earlier ruling in W.P.No.3838 of 2025, where it held that no caste can claim an exclusive right to administer a temple, as caste is not a religious denomination. “Caste is a social evil. Casteless society is our constitutional goal,” the court reiterated, emphasizing that perpetuating caste-based practices violates the principles of equality and fraternity enshrined in the Constitution.

The petitioner’s reliance on the 1924 scheme decree, later modified by the HR&CE Commissioner, was dismissed as unconstitutional. The court noted that the impugned notification, which opened trustee applications to the general public, aligned with the principles of equality and non-discrimination. The petition was dismissed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.