Kerala High Court upholds caste barrier for appointment as Melshanthi of Sabarimala temple

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed a batch of petitions challenging a notification issued by the Travancore Devaswom Board mandating that a candidate applying for the post of Melshanthi (high priest) of the Sabarimala Ayyappa Temple should be from the Malayala Brahmin community [Vishnunarayanan v. The Secretary]..A division bench of Justices Anil K Narendran and PG Ajithkumar passed the verdict in a batch of pleas that contended that restricting the selection of the high priest to persons from the Malayala Brahmin community was violative of rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. .The Court dismissed the writ petitions primarily on the ground that they lacked proper pleadings..The Court also rejected the contention that the notification issued by the Travancore Devaswom Board would amount to untouchability. It said that the right under Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution is only a right to enter the temple for worship and does not confer any right to perform services which only Archakas (priests) are entitled to perform. "As held by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Sri Venkataramana Devaru [AIR 1985 SC 255] the right protected by Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution is the right to enter into a temple for the purpose of worship. It does not follow from this that, this right is absolute and unlimited in character. No member of Hindu public could claim as part of the rights protected by Article 25(2)(b) that a temple must be kept open for worship at all hours of the day and night or that he should personally perform those services, which the Archakas alone could perform. Therefore, we find absolutely no merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.14136 of 2021 that the condition stipulated in clause 1 of the notification issued by the Devaswom Commissioner, that the applicant for appointment as Melsanthies of Sabarimala Devaswom and Malikappuram Devaswom shall be a ‘Malayali Brahmin’ would amount to untouchability abolished under Article 17 of the Constitution of India," the Court said in its judgment..However, it clarified that the contentions raised on the basis of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India are left open to be agitated in case the Supreme Court's position on the same changes in its 9-judge Sabarimala case relating to entry of women inside the Ayyappa temple. ."In the absence of proper pleadings in the statement of facts and grounds on the above aspects, with reference to the provisions under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India, we are of the view that it is not necessary to keep these writ petitions pending, awaiting the decision of the larger bench of the apex court in Kantaru Rajeevaru (Right to Religion In-Re 9 J [(2020) 3 SCC 52]. We make it clear that the arguments advanced by both sides on the above aspect are left open to be raised in an appropriate proceedings, at appropriate stage," the Court said. .By way of background, the Travancore Devaswom Board (the government body which governs the Sabarimala temple) through a notification dated May 27, 2021, had called for applications to the post of Santhikkaran (priest) at Sabarimala Dharmasastha Temple and Malikappuram Temple, from among the Malayala Brahmin community members alone.One of the pleas before the Court, filed in July 2021 through advocate BG Harindranath, challenged this notification on the ground that it was in total disregard to Supreme Court judgments and Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, and 21 of the Constitution.The plea said that the appointment to the post of Melshanthi has been held to be a secular act and that it ought not to have been confined to one particular community, especially in an institution administered by the Travancore Devaswom Board, which is fully controlled by the Government of Kerala.It was further contended that Articles 25 (freedom of religion) and 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) cannot be said to be infringed in appointing persons other than Brahmins to the post, as long as the appointment is from among persons who are fully qualified and trained in their duties irrespective of their caste..Dr. Mohan Gopal, representing some of the other petitioners, also argued as to how the notification fell foul of the Constitution.Gopal contended that restricting Melshanthi recruitment to Malayala Brahmin candidates was more a question of violation of the constitutional bar against practicing untouchability.He pointed out that the Sabarimala temple is non-denominational, i.e., it is for all Hindus and that the right to be a priest without a caste barrier is intrinsically linked to the right to enter and worship the temple without any discrimination on the basis of caste.His primary contention was that the decision of the Supreme Court in N Adithayan v The Travancore Devaswom Board & Ors. is binding on the High Court. In N Adithayan, the top court had upheld the right of a non-Malayala Brahmin to be appointed as a priest of a Shiva temple that was under the administration of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The same board administers the Sabarimala temple as well, the Court was told. .The Court today dismissed the petitions, effectively upholding the caste restrictions mentioned in the Devaswom Board's 2021 notification..[Read Judgment]