The petition filed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Commissioner Dhanabal before the Principal Sub-Court seeking removal of Madurai Adheenam Sri Arunagirinathar also submitted that the appointment of Nithyananda as the next pontiff was made without following the mutt's established procedures, custom and tradition.
The petitioner said the adheenam was not doing the 'Saya Rakshai Arakattalai Pooja' (evening pooja) at the famous Sri Meenakshi Amman temple for the past ten years and attached a certificate from temple authorities to this effect.
Regarding the appointment of Nithyanandha as the 293rd pontiff of the Mutt in April last, which had triggered protests from various quarters including several other Hindu mutt heads, he said only a mutt disciple could succeed as the heir of the Mutt.
But Nithyanandha was not a disciple of the Mutt. This was also violation of the provisions of the HR and CE Act. Series of objections and complaints had been raised against Nithyanandha's appointment, he submitted.
The Commissioner charged that the present adheenam had also formed a trust, jointly with Nithyanandha, on April 23, and registered it under the name Madurai Adheenam Trust. The motive of the trust, which has the two as trustees, was to sell the properties of the Mutt, he said contending the execution of the trust deed violated rules.
Judge Guruviah said he would hear the mutt and posted the case for hearing tomorrow.
