Rangarajan seeks SC protection for temple entry rights

Rangarajan said the submissions were made in the Sabarimala review proceedings to protect the Naishtika Brahmacharya character of the deity 

Metro India News | Hyderabad 

Chilkur Balaji Temple Archaka and Temples Protection Movement Co-Convener CS Rangarajan has highlighted the submissions made by the Tiruppan Alwar Ammal (SC/ST) community before the Supreme Court’s nine-judge Constitution Bench, seeking recognition of its pre-Constitutional temple entry right-cum-duty under Article 26(b).

Rangarajan stated that the community has argued that its traditional temple entry rights have religious and historical origins and that the divine source of such rights cannot be examined by courts due to the constitutional bar under Article 363. He said the submissions were made in the Sabarimala review proceedings to protect the Naishtika Brahmacharya character of the deity as well as to safeguard the community’s own temple entry rights.

He said the community’s rights came under discussion after senior counsels sought a review of the historic Devaru judgment, raising issues related to Article 363 and the justiciability of the origin of religious practices.

Rangarajan stated that the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly Deputy Speaker and Chairman of the Petitions Committee had forwarded a recommendation to the Union Law Secretary on June 8, 2026, requesting consideration of the community’s submissions and supporting documents by the Attorney General under Article 76. He added that former MP Venkatesh Neta also submitted a representation to the Union Law Minister on June 10 and later met the minister in New Delhi on June 19, seeking steps to protect the claimed temple entry rights from dilution. Rangarajan further said former Chief Justice of India Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, after being apprised of the developments, observed that any reconsideration of the Devaru judgment should be based on the correct constitutional reasoning and recognition of pre-Constitutional religious rights.

The Supreme Court had earlier recalled an order recording that the judgment was reserved in a related matter, noting that the nine-judge Constitution Bench verdict in the Sabarimala review case would have a direct bearing on the pending appeals.