The ongoing controversy surrounding the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp atop the ancient Deepathoon on Thiruparankundram hill in Madurai has once again come under judicial scrutiny. On Friday, the Madras High Court asked the Tamil Nadu government to explain its repeated failure to comply with court directions allowing devotees to perform the ritual, even as the state has approached the Supreme Court seeking urgent relief against the high court’s order. The situation has escalated into a politically charged and socially sensitive issue, drawing attention from across the state and the nation.

The dispute centers on the Deepathoon, an ancient stone lamp pillar situated atop the Thiruparankundram hill, which is home to several religious sites including the Subramaniya Swamy temple, the Kasi Viswanathan temple, and the Sikkander Badusha dargah. Historically, this hill has been a site of religious coexistence, with no significant disputes reported for decades. However, tensions resurfaced in February this year following protests by the Hindu Munnani, which condemned certain dietary practices on the hill. The issue has now re-emerged, coinciding with preparations for the 2026 Tamil Nadu assembly elections, thereby adding a political dimension to the matter.

The immediate flashpoint arose when a group of devotees filed a petition seeking permission to light the Karthigai Deepam lamp, a ritual considered an integral part of Tamil culture and tradition. On December 1, Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court permitted the devotees to conduct the ritual, emphasizing its cultural significance. The court explicitly directed that adequate security arrangements be made and that the devotees be allowed to access the site without obstruction. Despite these clear instructions, authorities at the district level and the local police allegedly blocked devotees from reaching the hill on December 4, resulting in widespread protests and the detention of several participants.

According to court records and reports, over 300 devotees who attempted to follow the court order were detained in a local marriage hall by the police. In addition, a case was registered against 113 individuals, including Tamil Nadu BJP president Nainar Nagenthran, senior party leader H. Raja, and six women who were actively involved in the protest. Advocate R.M. Arun Swaminathan, representing the petitioning devotees, informed the court that the authorities surrounded the devotees, threatened them with arrest, and physically obstructed their access to the hill. He alleged that the Deputy Commissioner of Police had violated the court’s orders and claimed that Section 144 of the CrPC was being invoked as a pretext to prevent compliance. The advocate further sought to include the State Home Department as a party to the proceedings, highlighting the scale of administrative resistance to the judicial mandate.

Justice Swaminathan, while expressing concern over the repeated obstruction, declined to expand the scope of the contempt petition but directed the state to file a detailed report explaining the circumstances that led to non-compliance. He also instructed the CISF commandant, who had accompanied the devotees in adherence to the High Court’s order, to submit a comprehensive account of how the devotees were prevented from performing the ritual. The contempt proceedings have been adjourned to December 9 to allow the state and the officials involved to respond adequately.

The Tamil Nadu government, led by Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), has simultaneously approached the Supreme Court, filing a special leave petition to challenge the Madras High Court’s directions permitting the lamp lighting. The petition seeks an urgent hearing of the matter before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. During proceedings in the Supreme Court, the petitioner’s counsel accused the state of “staging a drama” to create an impression before the Madurai bench that the matter had been escalated to the apex court. The Chief Justice directed the state to get its petition numbered and listed for hearing, effectively initiating the Supreme Court’s involvement in the dispute.

The state, represented by Additional Advocate General J. Ravindran and senior advocate Vikas Singh for the Madurai Police Commissioner, asserted that there was no intention to defy the court’s order. However, they cited on-ground realities that allegedly made compliance impossible. The state argued that logistical and security challenges in managing large crowds on the hill, coupled with the proximity of the dargah, complicated the enforcement of the court’s directions. Vikas Singh confirmed that the State and the Commissioner had moved the Supreme Court to challenge the Division Bench order that had upheld Justice Swaminathan’s December 1 direction. The High Court had previously quashed the Madurai Collector’s prohibitory order under Section 144 CrPC, terming it an attempt to circumvent judicial orders. The Division Bench upheld this judgment, describing the state’s appeal as a pre-emptive move to avoid contempt.

The controversy has unfolded against a backdrop of heightened political activity in Tamil Nadu, particularly with the 2026 assembly elections approaching. The issue has drawn sharp reactions from the BJP, which has accused the DMK-led state government of obstructing religious practices for political reasons. Chief Minister M.K. Stalin responded with a measured statement, suggesting that the people of Madurai would decide whether they prefer “development politics” or politics driven by religious controversies. In a post on the social media platform X, Stalin highlighted initiatives undertaken by his government in Madurai, including the Metro Rail project, the establishment of an AIIMS facility, promotion of new industries, and creation of job opportunities. He framed these developments as the real priorities of the city’s residents, contrasting them with the political focus on the lamp lighting issue.

Observers note that the Thiruparankundram hill holds significant cultural and religious importance for the local population. The Karthigai Deepam festival, which involves lighting the lamp on the Deepathoon, is a centuries-old tradition in Tamil Nadu and is celebrated with devotion and fanfare. Justice Swaminathan had emphasized that this ritual forms an integral part of Tamil cultural heritage and should be respected and facilitated by authorities. However, the state has consistently cited concerns over maintaining law and order, particularly given the mixed religious composition of the hill, which houses both Hindu temples and a dargah. This has created a complex situation where cultural, religious, and administrative considerations intersect.

The dispute also highlights a broader issue of compliance with judicial orders in Tamil Nadu. The repeated blocking of devotees despite court directives raises questions about the effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms and the willingness of administrative authorities to implement legal mandates. Legal experts suggest that this case could set a precedent regarding the balance between judicial authority and administrative discretion, particularly in matters involving religious practices and public order.

As of now, the immediate legal process is split between the Madras High Court, which continues to pursue contempt proceedings against the officials and seeks explanations for non-compliance, and the Supreme Court, which has been approached by the state for urgent intervention. The next hearings in both courts are expected to be closely monitored by political parties, religious groups, and civil society organizations.

In the meantime, the controversy has kept public attention riveted on Thiruparankundram hill. Hundreds of devotees have continued to express their desire to perform the lamp lighting, while political leaders from various parties have mobilized supporters to either defend or criticize the actions of the state government. The police and district administration are under pressure to manage both crowd control and legal compliance, highlighting the delicate nature of governance in situations where religious sentiment and politics intersect.

The Karthigai Deepam lamp controversy thus reflects the complex interplay of religion, law, and politics in Tamil Nadu. It underscores the challenges faced by state authorities in implementing court orders when public sentiment is involved, while also illustrating how religious rituals can become flashpoints in politically charged environments. The outcome of the pending proceedings, both in the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court, will have implications not only for the enforcement of judicial directives but also for the broader debate on the role of administration in facilitating or restricting cultural and religious practices.

As the situation continues to evolve, stakeholders—including the courts, government authorities, political parties, and the public—will be closely watching developments. The coming days are likely to determine whether the centuries-old ritual on Thiruparankundram hill can be performed in accordance with judicial orders and whether the state government can navigate the delicate balance between law, religion, and politics effectively.