The Indian Supreme Court recently refused to entertain a petition filed by the Vidhayahar (temple astrologer) of Sri Subramanya Swamy Temple of Thiruchendur, Tamil Nadu, regarding the timing of the upcoming Kumbhabhishekam (consecration ceremony) scheduled for July 7.
A bench of Justices Manoj Mishra and N Kotiswar Singh refused to intervene under Article 136 of the Constitution. The Vidhyahar had challenged the timings fixed by the five-member priest committee, claiming that it was not in consonance with the traditional auspicious hours.
"Keeping in view the nature of the cause stated in the writ petition filed before the High Court, we are of the view that the impugned orders do not call for any interference,"- The Supreme Court said.
Read also: Why did the Supreme Court Suspend Kiran Kumar's Sentence in Vismaya Dowry Death Case?
It further said,
"As per the second impugned order, it is directed that temples should follow the past practice of seeking opinion from the Vidhyahar only through written communication, provided the Vidhyahar indicates whether it is a draft or final pattolay, with regard to the date and time of the ceremonies."
During the hearing, the Vidhyahar emphasised that his suggested timings of 12:05 pm to 12:47 pm are more auspicious, and objected to the timings of 6:00 am to 6:50 am approved by the authorities. The controversy arose when the Department of Human Resource and Social Justice fixed a later date, which was later approved by the Madras High Court.
However, the respondents argued that the petitioner himself was part of the five-member expert committee constituted by the High Court, which finally fixed the date by a 4:1 majority. They pointed out that the petitioner gave several conflicting pattolis (astrological recommendations), which led to confusion.
The Madras High Court observed:
"If the Vidhayar had been careful and had stated in his first two pattolis that they were of draft nature and that he would come up with an unbiased pattolis in future after looking at the panchangam, this confusion would not have arisen."
A division bench of Justices S Shrimathi and R Vijayakumar observed:
"The committee constituted by this Court with the consent of both the parties had already been convened and the members of the said committee have decided about the time of consecration by a majority."
Read also: Appeal to Dismiss "Kahaani 2" Script Case in SC, Notice Issued on Sujoy Ghosh's Plea
The petitioner had initially filed a writ petition against the timing, which led to the High Court constituting the expert committee. Even after the timing was fixed, the petitioner filed a review petition questioning the process. However, both the High Court and the Supreme Court refused to interfere further.
The apex court concluded that no further judicial intervention was necessary and affirmed the expert committee's recommendation to hold the ceremony between 6:00 am and 6:47 am on July 7, 2025.
Appearance: Sr Adv K Parameshwar, AoR A Karthik, Advocates Smrithi Suresh, Sugam Agrawal and Ujjwal Sharma (for petitioner); Sr Advs R Shunmugasundaram and M Sathyanaryanan, AoRs Misha Rohatgi and B Karunakaran, Advocates Nakul Mohta, Sneha Menan, Shakeena, AG and M Muthugeethayan (for respondents)
Case Title: R.SIVARAMA SUBRAMANIYA SASTHIRIGAL v. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, SLP(C) No. 017191 - 017194 / 2025
