New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided that the Constitutional Court could not interfere with the daily rituals and practices in a temple based on the writing petition and said that if there was a worshiper who was harmed by the shortcomings or ritual violations he had to use a civil suit or approaching The appropriate forum is looking for help.
“If a worshiper is harmed by non-performance every daily ritual correctly or deviation from daily practice in a temple, he can file a civil suit or approach the forum that is suitable for complaints.
HCS and SC cannot deal with it,” said Chairman of Justice and Ramana and As Bopanna and Hima Kohli judge.
However, the APEX court clarified that if a Devaswom Board or the administration of the temple failed in its duty to make the right arrangements for worshipers or pampering themselves in the temple maladministration, then a worshiper can be permitted to seek the redressal of his complaint before HCS or SC through the writing petition.
The verdict came to the petition submitted by Srivari Dadaa, who accused Tirumala Tirupati Devaswom (TTD) the Council deviated from the daily ritual.
Andhra Pradesh HC has been on January 5 rejected the Petitioner’s pill and said, “The procedure to commit rituals is the exclusive domain of Devasthanam and cannot be an adjudication problem except the impact of other or civilian rights of others”.
TTD is an independent belief that manages the temple including the famous Swamy Venkateshwara Lord Temple, in the AP.
Dadaa has alleged that the Temple authorities have made Sevas in “wrong and irregular procedures”.
Approved HC, LED bench CJI said, “The Constitutional Court cannot begin to disturb the daily rituals of the temples and habits and practices because they cannot be managed legally.
Can we manage the daily puja? Legal mandates where the Constitutional Court can interfere with everyday rituals.
Can we Dictate the temple authority.
How should coconut be broken in front of gods? Can we tell the priests how to do aarti? This seems to be a litigation of publicity interest.
“