The Prince of Arcot (also known as Amir-e-Arcot) is a hereditary and titular position held by the head of the House of Arcot, a noble Muslim family based in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. Although it holds no sovereign power, the title continues to carry ceremonial, religious, and cultural significance in South India.
The Arcot title originates from the Nawab of the Carnatic dynasty. In 1855, following the death of Ghulam Muhammad Ghouse Khan without a male heir, the British East India Company annexed the Carnatic using the Doctrine of Lapse.
In 1867, Queen Victoria created the title of Prince of Arcot in favour of Azim Jah, a close relative of the Nawabs of the Carnatic, recognising his familyâÂÂs long loyalty to the British Crown.
Although the abolition of royal privileges in 1971 removed constitutional recognition for Indian princes, the Prince of Arcot continues to be regarded as a traditional community leader and a custodian of Muslim endowments in Tamil Nadu. The Prince oversees the Prince of Arcot Endowments, managing mosques, schools, and charitable trusts in India and abroad.
The Prince resides at Amir Mahal in Chennai, a 19th-century Indo-Saracenic palace that continues to serve as the seat of the family.
The legitimacy of continuing to use the title âÂÂPrince of Arcotâ and the maintenance of his privileges have occasionally been subjects of public debate and legal scrutiny.
In 2019, a public interest litigation was filed before the Madras High Court seeking the withdrawal of the PrinceâÂÂs title, pension, and government maintenance of Amir Mahal. The petitioner argued that such privileges contradicted the Constitution of India, especially after the 1971 abolition of princely recognition.
A Division Bench comprising Justices S. Manikumar and Subramonium Prasad dismissed the PIL, holding that:
Scholars and commentators have periodically questioned whether hereditary titles such as âÂÂPrince of Arcotâ align with the egalitarian principles of the Indian Republic. Critics argue that the continued government maintenance of Amir Mahal and payment of pensions may symbolically contradict the abolition of royal privileges.
However, supporters claim that the title is purely honorary and that the PrinceâÂÂs social and charitable work justify limited government support for the upkeep of historical properties and endowments.