No Clinching Material To Show Exact Birth Date Of Thiruvalluvar: Madras High Court Declines To Interfere With Govt Holiday

Justice M Dhandapani said that since there was no evidence to know the exact birth date of Thiruvalluvar, the court could not issue such directions to the State.

“From the aforesaid materials, it is evident that there is no clinching material to show the exact birthday of Thiruvalluvar. In the absence of any concrete proof evidencing the birthday of Thiruvalluvar, this Court, sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot give any affirmative direction to the respondents to fix the birthday of Thiruvalluvar as falling on the Anusham Star in the Tamil Month of Vaikasi,” the court observed.

The court agreed with the State's submission that the government policy was only to celebrate Thiruvalluvar and his greatness and nowhere the State mentioned that the day was to be celebrated as the birthday of Thiruvalluvar.

“Only to celebrate the greatness of Thirukkural, which is a cherished testament by all, irrespective of caste, creed or religion, the respondents have earmarked the 2nd day of the Tamil month of Thai to be celebrated as a mark of respect for the great saint and Tamil poet. There is no mention in the Government Order that it is the birthday of Thiruvalluvar and only to celebrate the same, the 2nd day of the Tamil month of Thai is earmarked,” the court said.

The petitioner had argued that the day being celebrated by the Government was not a correct day. He argued that Thiruvalluvar's birth date was celebrated on Tamil star “Anusham” for over 600 years and the government had changed the same under the guise of policy. It was argued that the customs and traditions in Tamil Nadu that were associated with centuries of history and practice and being followed by the people of the State had been changed by the government.

The petitioner also argued that the State, under the guise of policy, could not change the tradition that was being followed from time immemorial, and forcing the followers to adapt to the policy was wholly unconstitutional, illegal, and deserved to be interfered with.

The petitioner had also argued that changing the birthdate of Thiruvalluvar and violating the customary and conventional practices stipulated under Article 13(1) of the Constitution was void as it was a derogation of fundamental rights.

The State, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner's argument that Vaikasi Anusham was celebrated as Thiruvalluvar's birthday was wholly incorrect. It was argued that merely celebrating Thiruvalluvar day on the 2^nd day of Thai months could not be considered as changing the birthdate of Thiruvalluvar. Thus, it was argued that the interpretation of the petitioner was grossly erroneous and merely a figment of his imagination. It was submitted that the government's action was neither arbitrary, unconstitutional or perverse.

The court agreed with the State's submission and noted that as a welfare state, in order to promote linguistic harmony, the respondents had the liberty to celebrate any particular day as a mark of respect to Thiruvalluvar and the same could not be faulted with.

Thus, noting that no case had been made out by the petitioner, the court observed that the petition was devoid of merits and dismissed the same.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Dr. S.Padma

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. P.S.Raman, AG, Assisted By Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Faizal, AGP, Mr. S.Ravichandran, AGP

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356

Case Title: Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others

Case No: W.P. NO.10392 OF 2021