President Urged to Protect Temple Rights

Rangarajan Chilukoor urges President to protect Tiruppan Alwar Ammal community's Article 26(b) rights in Sabarimala case

Metro India News | Hyderabad 

The Temples Protection Movement has urged the President of India to ensure protection of the constitutional rights of Lord Shri Padmanabha Swamy and the traditional temple rights of the Tiruppan Alwar Ammal community in the pending nine-judge Constitution Bench case before the Supreme Court.

In a representation, Rangarajan Chilukoor, Archaka of Sri Chilkur Balaji Temple and Co-Convener of the Temples Protection Movement, said the President, as the guardian of the Constitution, has a responsibility to uphold constitutional values. Referring to the observations of late constitutional expert Nani Palkhivala, he said the office of the President represents the nation's conscience and dharma.

The letter stated that the Supreme Court's July 13, 2020 judgment in the Shri Padmanabha Swamy Temple case was a landmark ruling recognising the deity's legal status. It further claimed that the Tiruppan Alwar Ammal (SC/ST) community has informed the Supreme Court that its pre-Constitution temple entry rights and Ammal duty are protected under Article 26(b) of the Constitution and that their divine origin cannot be examined by courts due to Article 363.

According to the representation, the community has asserted these rights to protect the Naishtika Brahmacharya character of the Sabarimala deity as well as its own traditional temple entry practices. It said these issues have become significant during the hearing of the nine-judge Constitution Bench examining questions arising from the Sabarimala case.

The letter also referred to developments in June 2026, stating that the Chairman of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly Petitions Committee recommended to the Union Law Secretary that the Attorney General invoke powers under Article 76 and support the community's constitutional submissions before the Supreme Court. It added that former MP Venkatesh Neta also represented the matter before the Union Law Minister and sought protection of the community's rights.

The representation further said former Chief Justice of India Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah was informed of these developments and reportedly expressed the view that the Attorney General should assist the Supreme Court by placing the constitutional position regarding Articles 26(b) and 363 before the Bench, even if the matter had already been reserved for judgment.

The letter also cited a recent Supreme Court order in Civil Appeal No. 5924 of 2008, where the court recalled an earlier order reserving judgment because the issues involved were linked to the pending nine-judge Constitution Bench. It urged that a similar approach be followed so that all relevant constitutional aspects are considered before the final judgment is delivered.