Madras High Court slams State for not allowing Hindu man to use public ground in Christian majority village

The Madras High Court recently criticised a Tahsildar's refusal to permit a Hindu resident to hold Annadhanam (distribution of food) at a local public ground on apprehensions that such use may lead to law and order problems since the site had been used only by Christians for over 100 years at the Christian-majority village.

Justice GR Swaminathan highlighted that India is a secular country, and that all public grounds must be available for use either by all communities or none.

"When the land in question is not a patta land but belongs to the Government, it should be available to all sections irrespective of religious or communal background ... I hold that if a public ground belonging to the State is available for use of the general public, a particular section cannot be excluded from using the same. If the sole ground of exclusion is religion, it certainly would offend Article 15 of the Constitution of India," he said in the October 31 ruling.

The judge also rejected an argument by a Christian respondent that there has been an agreement since 1912 that only Christians would use the public ground in question, which agreement was allegedly reinforced during a peace meeting held in 2017.

"We are a secular, democratic republic. Our Constitution came into force on 26.01.1950. Any pre-constituitonal arrangement that is not in accord with the constitutional provisions and ethos cannot be allowed to continue. A public ground should be available for the use of all communities or none. I cannot accept the submission that while Christians can use the ground on Easter but Hindus cannot conduct Annadhanam in the very same place," the Court said.

Justice Swaminathan further reasoned that it is not as if the holding of the Annadhanam was being sought during Easter, when the Christians actually use the ground for their celebrations. He questioned how the rights of the Christians would be affected if the Annadhanam took place on November 3, when the ground was free to be used by others.

"It is not as if on the occasion of Easter, the Hindus want to conduct Annadhanam or any other event in the very same ground. I would go to the extent of observing that when it comes to Easter celebrations, the Christian community alone should be allowed to use the ground," he remarked.

The Court, therefore, set aside the Athur Taluk Tashildar's October 24 refusal to allow the Annadhanam at the ground.

The Tashildar had earlier permitted the Hindu resident, K Rajamani, to hold the food distribution, but at another site. Aggrieved, Rajamani approached the High Court and questioned why he was not allowed to hold the Annadhanam at the open ground he had originally requested.

The site in question lay in the vicinity of the Kaliyamman temple. Rajamani had sought to hold the food distribution on the occasion of the Kumbabisekam (sanctification renewal ritual) of the temple.

On October 31, the Court permitted the same. Among other observations, it also noted that in an earlier case, the High Court had also permitted a bible study centre's establishment while making it clear that mere apprehensions of law and order cannot come in the way of religious rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

"What applies to the establishment of a bible study centre will equally apply for holding an Annadhanam event in connection with Kumbabisekam," the Court held.

Justice Swaminathan further lamented that the opposition to holding the Annadhanam at the open ground reflected a "sorry state of affairs."

He noted that "Hindus are grossly outnumbered by the Christians" in the village, since there are 2,500 Christian families in the village and only 400 Hindu families. He reasoned that this could be the reason why the local police cited law and order risks if the Annadhanam is held at the site, since Christians had opposed the same.

"It is a very sorry state of affairs. In every religious event, there must be participation from the other religionists also. When a Christian friend celebrates Christmas, I should greet him first," the judge remarked.

While calling for such harmony between different religious communities, Justice Swaminathan also remembered how a Muslim friend offered him vegetarian food during Ramzan to respect his beliefs.

"I remember an occasion when a Muslim friend prepared only vegetarian Nonbu Kanji so that I can have the same. Needless to say, I relished it. Such is the beauty of our culture. Such interactions alone will ensure inter-religious harmony. Unless such cultural and civilisational unity is demonstrated in practice, there will not be peace in society," the judge warned.

Advocate P Manikandan appeared for K Rajamani.

Special Government Pleader P Subbaraj appeared for the Joint Commissioner of the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment in Dindigul.

Special Government Pleader M Lingadurai appeared for the Athur Taluk Tashildar.

Government Advocate A Albert James appeared for the Inspector of Police at Chinalapatti, Dindigul.

Advocate A John Vincent appeared for a private respondent, Suresh Perkmans.

[Read Judgment]