The Madras High Court’s Madurai Division Bench on Tuesday upheld a single judge’s order permitting the lighting of a ceremonial lamp atop the Thiruparankundram Hills in Madurai as part of the Tamil Karthigai Deepam festival, firmly rejecting objections raised by the Tamil Nadu government. The judgment has been hailed by devotees as a significant affirmation of religious tradition, while also drawing sharp observations from the court on the State’s approach to the issue.

A division bench comprising Justices G Jayachandran and K.K. Ramakrishnan upheld the December 1 order passed by single judge Justice G.R. Swaminathan, which had allowed the lighting of a lamp at a stone pillar, commonly referred to as the “Deepathoon,” on the hill. The bench ruled that the State and district administration had failed to establish that the ritual was alien to Tamil religious tradition or that it posed a genuine threat to public order.

Court dismisses State’s law-and-order concerns

In a strongly worded judgment, the High Court rejected the State government’s contention that permitting the ritual could disturb communal harmony or law and order. The bench described the apprehensions expressed by the authorities as exaggerated and unfounded.

“The fear expressed by the State is nothing but an imaginary ghost created for its own convenience,” the court observed. It went on to say that the idea that a single ritual performed once a year by representatives of the temple administration could destabilise public peace was “ridiculous and hard to believe.”

The court added an unusually sharp caveat, warning that public disorder would arise only if such disturbance were actively sponsored. “Of course, it may happen only if such a disturbance is sponsored by the State itself. We pray that no State should stoop to that level to achieve their political agenda,” the bench remarked.

The judges further noted that instead of viewing the occasion as an opportunity to foster harmony and coexistence, the State had attempted to politicise the matter by pitting one community against another. This, the court said, was deeply regrettable.

Background of the dispute

The case arose from a long-standing controversy over the lighting of Karthigai Deepam on the Thiruparankundram Hills, which are considered sacred by devotees of Lord Muruga. The hill is also home to a dargah, and the presence of religious structures associated with different faiths has historically required careful administrative handling.

At the centre of the dispute is a stone pillar located atop the hill, which devotees refer to as a “Deepathoon” — a traditional pillar used for lighting ceremonial lamps during festivals such as Karthigai Deepam. Devotees have claimed that lighting a lamp at this spot is an ancient Tamil religious practice linked to the Thiruparankundram Murugan temple.

The State government, however, opposed the practice, arguing that there was no conclusive historical or archaeological evidence to establish that the pillar was meant for lighting lamps. Authorities also raised concerns that the ritual could inflame communal tensions due to the proximity of the dargah.

Earlier proceedings and marathon hearing

On December 18 last year, the same division bench had reserved its verdict after a five-day marathon hearing on a batch of appeals challenging Justice Swaminathan’s December 1 order. The appeals were filed by the State government and other parties who objected to the permission granted for lighting the lamp.

The bench heard arguments from a wide range of stakeholders, including the Tamil Nadu government, district and police authorities, officials of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department, temple representatives, devotees, and representatives of the dargah. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was also involved, given that the hill is a protected site.

During the hearings, the State reiterated its position that the issue involved questions of custom and tradition that could not be resolved through writ proceedings.

State’s legal arguments rejected

Tamil Nadu Advocate General P.S. Raman, appearing for the State, argued that there was no empirical data or historical proof to conclusively establish that the stone pillar was a Deepathoon traditionally used for lighting lamps. He maintained that determining the origin, nature, and purpose of the pillar required a detailed statutory inquiry rather than adjudication through writ jurisdiction.

The Advocate General also contended that the matter involved the determination of established customs, which, under the law, fell within the exclusive domain of the authorities under the HR&CE Act. He argued that Section 63 of the Act provided a self-contained mechanism for adjudicating disputes relating to religious usage and customs, and that the High Court should not have intervened at this stage.

Additionally, the State argued that the single judge had erred by converting what was essentially a claim of customary right into a claim of property right. It also objected to what it described as permitting a “usual festival in an unusual manner,” suggesting that the order disrupted existing practices rather than preserving them.

The division bench, however, was not persuaded by these arguments. It held that the State had failed to demonstrate, even prima facie, that the lighting of the lamp was alien to Tamil tradition or that it posed any real threat to public order.

Observations on communal harmony

The court was particularly critical of the narrative advanced by the State that the ritual could disrupt communal harmony. The bench observed that harmony was best preserved through accommodation and dialogue, not by imposing blanket prohibitions on religious practices.

The judges noted that instead of working with all stakeholders to ensure peaceful observance of the ritual, the State appeared to have taken an adversarial stance. This approach, the court said, risked deepening divisions rather than resolving them.

At the same time, the court acknowledged the sensitive nature of the site and the need for careful regulation. It emphasised that since the Thiruparankundram Hills are a protected area, any activity there must be subject to reasonable restrictions.

Conditions and safeguards

While upholding the permission to light the lamp, the High Court clarified that the ritual could not be carried out in an unregulated manner. The bench directed that all aspects of the event — including the manner of lighting the lamp and the number of persons allowed to be present — must be finalised through consultation among the temple administration, the ASI, and the local police.

This, the court said, would ensure that religious practices were respected while also safeguarding the archaeological integrity of the site and maintaining public order.

Devotees welcome verdict

The judgment was welcomed by the petitioner, Rama Ravikumar, who described it as a victory for devotees of Lord Muruga and for the preservation of Tamil religious traditions. Supporters said the ruling reaffirmed the right of devotees to practise age-old customs and rejected what they viewed as unnecessary state interference in matters of faith.

Devotees had consistently argued that they were not seeking to introduce a new custom but to revive an old and essential religious practice associated with the Karthigai Deepam festival. They maintained that lighting the lamp on the hilltop was an integral part of Murugan worship and deeply rooted in Tamil spiritual tradition.

A significant ruling

The Madras High Court’s decision is significant not only for devotees of Thiruparankundram but also for its broader implications on how courts view the balance between religious freedom, administrative authority, and communal harmony. By upholding the single judge’s order and delivering pointed criticism of the State’s objections, the court has sent a strong message that speculative fears cannot override religious practices without compelling evidence.

As arrangements are now expected to be worked out among temple authorities, the ASI, and the police, the focus will shift to ensuring that the ritual is conducted peacefully and with due regard for all sensitivities. The verdict, however, stands as a clear judicial endorsement of the lighting of the Deepathoon as part of the Tamil Karthigai Deepam tradition.