Govt should frame rules for appointment of EO's to temples:HC

Pulling up the state government for not framing rules under HR&CE act to appoint Executive Officers in temples as per the Supreme Court decision, Madras High Court today made it clear that such appointments cannot be made unless these rules were framed.
Quashing an appointment to Arulmigu Vaithianathaswamy Devasthanam in Nagapattinam District, Justice S Nagamuthu quoted a Supreme Court judgement and said there has arisen an urgent need for government to frame Rules under Section 116 of the HR&CE Act for appointing Executive officers.
"Otherwise, I am sure, the maladministration of temples in the state cannot be curtailed and the Commissioner will not be in a position to regulate the administration of the Temples by appointing Executive officers," he said.

Justice Nagamuthu stated this while allowing a petition filed by hereditary trustee of the temple, challenging the show cause notice issued by HR&CE Commissioner, asking him to explain why an Executive officer should not be appointed for one year and his order appointing Executive officer.
The trustee in his petition stating that government has not issued any rules prescribing the conditions under Sec 45(1) of HR&CE Act, for appointment of EO.
He submitted that unless government prescribes the circumstances/conditions upon which such appointment could be made, the power cannot be exercised by the Commissioner.

Justice Nagamuthu said a plain reading of the Apex Court judgement would reveal it has once and for all declared it as a law that under Sec 45(1)of HR&CE Act, the commissioner can appoint an EO for temple if there comes into being a rule prescribing the circumstances/conditions upon which such power can be exercised by the Commissioner.

The judge noted that the state Government has so far not framed any rules under 116 of HR&CE Act as has held by Supreme Court and made it clear that unless such rules are issued the Commissioner cannot exercise his power to appoint EO, irrespective of situation availing in the temple.
To government pleader's query on whether the order would affect appointments made in other temples in the state, he said
it was not possible to confine the answer to the legal issue only to this case in view of the Supreme Court judgement.
The Judge hoped government would frame guidelines and rules as held by the Supreme Court.