The state government filed the petition on June 11 through Tamil Nadu government counsel B. Karunakaran. The counsel confirmed that the plea challenges the January 6 order of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, which had upheld a single-judge order dated December 1, 2025, directing that the ceremonial lamp be lit on the festival day.
On January 6, the High Court upheld the earlier order and rejected concerns raised over law and order. The court stated that apprehensions regarding public order arising from the religious practice were unfounded. It clarified that the site where the stone lamp pillar is located belongs to the Sri Subramania Swamy Temple and that the Waqf Board, as of now, has no legal standing in the matter.
The court observed that it was difficult to accept the argument that allowing representatives of the Devasthanam to light the lamp at the stone pillar near the top of the hill, situated within temple land, on one day in a year would disturb public peace. The bench further remarked that such a disturbance could occur only if it was encouraged by the State itself and expressed hope that no government would descend to such a level for political purposes.
The dispute originated from a writ petition filed by Rama Ravikumar and others seeking directions to light the sacred lamp at the ancient stone pillar on Thirupparankundram hill during the annual Karthigai Deepam festival held in November and December. On December 1, 2025, a single judge of the High Court allowed the petition and ordered that the ceremonial lamp be lit on the festival day.
Subsequently, the then Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam government, along with the temple administration and the Hazarath Sultan Sikkandar Badhusha Avuliya Dargah at Thirupparankundram, challenged the single-judge order by filing appeals.
The state government had argued that the lighting of the lamp near the hilltop, located close to the dargah, could trigger communal tensions and affect public order. However, while dismissing the appeals, the High Court stated that the Waqf Board had no legal standing in the matter. The bench noted that during arguments in the intra-court appeals, a submission was made on behalf of the Waqf claiming that the lamp pillar belonged to the dargah. The court described the claim as mischievous and said it had further increased doubts regarding the mediation proposal offered by the Waqf Board under court supervision.
The bench also observed that the State administration should have used the opportunity to reduce differences between the two communities. It said the district administration could have narrowed the divide through peaceful and meaningful negotiations instead of allowing the dispute to escalate.
The latest move by the Tamil Nadu government has shifted the sensitive religious and legal dispute to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a crucial examination of issues involving religious practices, public order, and competing claims over the historic site at Thirupparankundram.
About The Author
Comment List