Madras High Court hears plea to prevent shifting of Yagasalai Poojas for Skandha Sashti festival

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 29 October 2026

Case: R.Sivarama Subramaniya Sasthri vs The Commissioner
Court: Madras High Court
Decided: 23 October 2026
Source: Indian Kanoon (Madras HC)

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In R.Sivarama Subramaniya Sasthri vs The Commissioner, decided on 2026-10-23, the Madras High Court heard writ petitions seeking to restrain the respondents from shifting the Yagasalai Poojas for the Skandha Sashti festival from its existing location in Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Tiruchendur.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

The source text does not provide the court's reasoning or a legal principle applied, as it only describes the initial hearing and the petitioners' prayer.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should note that the court is considering petitions regarding the location of religious ceremonies within temples. Litigants seeking to prevent changes in traditional practices may approach the High Court via writ petitions.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Writ petitions were filed concerning the location of Yagasalai Poojas for the Skandha Sashti festival.
2Petitioners sought to prevent the shifting of the Yagasalai from its existing Mandapam.
3The matter involves the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Tiruchendur.

The Legal Issue The petitioners in W.P.(MD)No.30468 of 2026, a registered society of Thiriswathanthirargal, and the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.30445 of 2026, a Thiriswathanthirargar and Vidhayakartha, approached the Madras High Court. Their primary prayer was to ensure that the Yagasalai Poojas for the Skandha Sashti festival, both for the current year and subsequent years, are conducted in the existing Yagasalai Mandapam. This Mandapam is situated in the first Prakaram between the Sannadhis of Goddesses Valli and Deivanai at Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Tiruchendur. They sought an order to restrain the respondents from relocating the Sashti Yagasalai from its current site to any other place.

Court's Reasoning The provided excerpt details the initial hearing of the writ petitions. The court heard arguments from the learned counsel for the writ petitioners, the learned Additional Advocate General, and the learned Senior Counsel for the temple. However, the excerpt does not contain the court's reasoning, observations, or any decision on the merits of the petitions. It only outlines the parties involved and the specific relief sought by the petitioners.

What Follows The excerpt does not indicate any specific directions issued by the court or the outcome of the petitions. The matter appears to be in the initial stages of hearing, with arguments presented by various parties. Further proceedings would be required to determine the court's decision regarding the petitioners' request to prevent the shifting of the Yagasalai Poojas.