Statue Installed In Temple Land Without Permission Must Be Removed: Madras High Court Orders Removal Of Periyar Statue
The Bench directed the District Collector to safely remove the statue from temple land and relocate it to a suitable place within four weeks, notes status report found it was not on government poramboke land.
The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench has directed the removal of a statue of E.V. Ramasamy (Periyar) from the premises of Arulmigu Bramasirakandeeswarar Temple at Kandiyur, Thiruvaiyar Taluk, Thanjavur District. The Court noted that the statue was installed in temple land without permission from the temple authority, the District Collector or any other competent authority.
The Court directed the District Collector, Thanjavur, to remove the statue safely from the temple land and place it in some other suitable place within four weeks, and to file a report. The matter is to be listed after four weeks for reporting compliance.
A Division Bench of Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan observed, “…Since the statue is installed in the temple land without obtaining permission either from the temple authority or from the District Collector or from any other competent authority, the 4th respondent / District Collector is directed to remove the said statue safely from the temple land and also place it in some other suitable place within a period of four weeks from today and file a report”.
Advocate J. Jaaswant appeared for the petitioner and K.K. Udayakumar, Government Advocate appeared for the respondent.
The petitioner, Rama Ravikumar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to the State and its officials to remove the statue from the temple at Survey No. 313/35, Kandiyur. The prayer relied on a recommendation of the Joint Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Thanjavur, made in proceedings dated July 8, 2026.
The respondents included the State of Tamil Nadu through the Principal Secretary, Department of Tourism, Culture and Endowments, the HR and CE Commissioner and Joint Commissioner, the District Collector, the Superintendent of Police, the Tahsildar of Thiruvaiyar Taluk, the temple through its Fit Person/Executive Officer, and the Inspector of Police, Thiruvaiyaru.
The Bench relied on the status report filed by the District Collector, where the report revealed that the statue stands on temple land and not on Government poramboke land. Since it was installed without permission from the temple authority, the District Collector or any other competent authority, the Court directed its removal.
The Court disposed of the writ petition with the above direction and made no order as to costs. It held that the proposed respondent was not a necessary party to be impleaded and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.
Cause Title: Rama Ravikumar v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors., W.P.(MD) No. 22916 of 2026.
Appearances:
Petitioner: J. Jaaswant, Advocate.
Respondents: K.K. Udayakumar, Government Advocate, S.I. Muthiah, Additional Government Pleader, J. Vishnu, Government Advocate (Criminal Side), Chandrasekar, Standing Counsel.