MHC seeks HR&CE reply on plea against ban on caste names in temple festival invites
Arumuga Nainar, state general secretary of the Hindu Temple Protection Committee general secretary Arumuga Nainar said in the petition that the HR&CE Commissioner issued a circular against the mention of any caste or family name of sponsors or community group on temple festival invitations.;

MHC seeks HR&CE reply on plea against ban on caste names in temple festival invites
MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has sought a response from the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department on a public interest litigation petition challenging a circular that prohibits any mention of caste names on temple festival invitations.
Arumuga Nainar, state general secretary of the Hindu Temple Protection Committee general secretary Arumuga Nainar said in the petition that the HR&CE Commissioner issued a circular against the mention of any caste or family name of sponsors or community group on temple festival invitations.
Accordingly, the Executive Officer made a statement orally that the names of Mandagapadi Tharar should not be printed on invitations to the Panguni festival of Kasinatha Swamy Temple, Ambasamudram, and Papanasam Swamy Kovil.
However, the court of law did not issue any order, which is generally applicable to all temples. Citing these, the petitioner said it was misconstrued by the Commissioner of HR&CE and the circular was issued.
Moreover, the counsel on behalf of the petitioner contended that the practice of including the names of Mandagapadi Tharars on festival invitations has been a longstanding tradition and an integral part of temple customs.
Citing these, the petitioner sought the intervention of the court to allow the organisers to print the names of Mandagapadi Tharar on invitations to the Panguni festival and also sought an interim stay on the circular.
A division bench comprising Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice S Srimathy granted an interim stay on the operation of the circular. The stay would be effective for four weeks and directed the Commissioner of the HR&CE to respond before adjourning the case.