<p>Disposing a writ petition filed by S Krishnamurthy, secretary of the Thirusuthanthirarkal (people who are entitled to do various services inside the temple except performing poojas), Justice R S Ramanathan of the Madurai bench of the HC said: “The materials provided by both the parties in respect of ‘Siva Agamam’ are giving conflicting views about the place where the ‘Yagasala’ can be established.” Besides, the judge said, the scriptures applicable to Saivite temples in general could not be applied to Tiruchendur temple as it was following separate pooja rules based on Kerala “Tanthra Samuchayam.”<br />Citing the example of the decisions taken by the temple authorities to end the old practices such as closure of temple for “Uchikala pooja” (mid day pooja) and distribution of holy ash owing to steep increase in the number of pilgrims, the judge said it is the prerogative of the temple management to decide the location of the “Yagasala.”<br /></p>
<p>Disposing a writ petition filed by S Krishnamurthy, secretary of the Thirusuthanthirarkal (people who are entitled to do various services inside the temple except performing poojas), Justice R S Ramanathan of the Madurai bench of the HC said: “The materials provided by both the parties in respect of ‘Siva Agamam’ are giving conflicting views about the place where the ‘Yagasala’ can be established.” Besides, the judge said, the scriptures applicable to Saivite temples in general could not be applied to Tiruchendur temple as it was following separate pooja rules based on Kerala “Tanthra Samuchayam.”<br />Citing the example of the decisions taken by the temple authorities to end the old practices such as closure of temple for “Uchikala pooja” (mid day pooja) and distribution of holy ash owing to steep increase in the number of pilgrims, the judge said it is the prerogative of the temple management to decide the location of the “Yagasala.”<br /></p>