Supreme Court Issues Notice On Petition Challenging Kerala HC’s Ruling On Melshanthis Appointment At Sabarimala And Malikappuram Temple

On Friday, August 9, the Supreme Court issued a notice regarding a petition contesting the Kerala High Court’s decision, which upheld a requirement that only Malayali Brahmins are eligible for appointment as Melshanthis (Chief Priests) of the Sabarimala and Malikappuram temples.

The notice was issued by a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan to the State of Kerala, represented by the Devaswom Department, the Devaswom Commissioner, and the Travancore Devaswom Board. This development came after a petition was filed by two non-Brahmin priests, represented by Dr. Mohan Gopal.

The petitioners argued that they were otherwise fully qualified to be appointed as Melshanthis. They contended that the condition imposed by the Devaswom Commissioner—a State official—restricting the appointment to Malayali Brahmins amounts to caste-based discrimination, thereby violating their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution.

In its earlier ruling, the Kerala High Court bench, consisting of Justices Anil K Narendran and PG Ajithkumar, upheld the condition. The court stated that the right to enter a temple for worship is not absolute or unlimited. It rejected the petitioners’ argument that the condition was equivalent to “untouchability,” which is prohibited under Article 17 of the Constitution.

The High Court emphasised that no member of the Hindu community could claim a constitutional right under Article 25(2)(b) to have a temple open at all hours or to perform rituals exclusively reserved for the archakas (priests). Therefore, the court found no merit in the petitioners’ contention that the notification’s stipulation amounted to untouchability.

The High Court did not address the broader issues concerning the relationship between fundamental rights and religious rights, noting that these matters lacked proper pleadings in the petitions and are currently pending adjudication in a related Sabarimala reference case before the Supreme Court.