State officials must comply with judicial orders related to the right of worship, or face contempt proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

1. The appellants before us are the District Collector, Madurai and the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City. This Letters Patent Appeal is filed by them being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Cont.P.(MD) No.3594 of 2025, dated 03.12.2025.

2. One Mr.Rama.Ravikumar filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.32317 of 2025 seeking direction to the fourth respondent for lighting Karthigai Deepam at Deepa Thoon (ancient Stone Lamp Pillar) situated at the Thirupparankundram Hill Top in accordance with the order of this Court in W.P.No.18884 of 1994, dated 21.11.1996. In the alternative, to permit the writ petitioner to light the same on 03.12.2025 by making necessary administrative and security arrangements including the bandobust scheme by the respondents in the writ petition.

3. According to the writ petitioner, when he requested the Executive Officer of Arulmigu Subramaniya Swamy Temple, Thirupparankundram, through his representation dated 28.10.2025, to comply with the orders of the High Court mentioned above, the same was rejected vide communication dated 03.11.2025. Hence, the cause of action for the writ petitioner for the relief of certiorarified mandamus.

4. The learned Single Judge, on considering the relief sought in W.P.(MD)No.32317 of 2025 and the other connected writ petitions filed with the similar prayer, impleaded the representatives of Sikkandar Darga located nearby the Deepa Thoon and had passed the order on 01.12.2025. The operative portion of the order reads as under:

“40.In passing, I may refer to a resolution that was passed in the peace committee meeting held on 01.12.2005 in the office of the RDO. The Dargha management had signed the minutes expressing their no objection for lighting the lamp at Deepathoon. They made it clear that the lamp can be lit at any place beyond 15 meters from the Dargha. Though this is not an enforceable resolution, one can safely conclude that the opposition appears to be more at the instance of certain vested interests. In fact, in the order dated 21.11.1996 itself, there is a reference to a similar agreement arrived at on 04.11.1994. But then, it was claimed that it was done at the behest of the authorities.

41.The balance of convenience can also be noted. By lighting the lamp at Deepathoon, the rights of the Dargha or the Muslims will not in any way be affected. The Dargah management has not demonstrated as to how they will be affected if the lamp is lit at the Deepathoon. It is not their case that Deepathoon is within the Dargha campus. On the other hand, if the lamp is not lit at Deepathoon, there is always a possibility that the rights of the temple may be jeopardised.

42.For the reasons mentioned above, I direct the temple management/devasthanam to light the Karthigai Deepam at Deepathoon also apart from the usual places. Karthigai is also a festival of light. Lamps are lit all over the house and not in the pooja room alone. The Karthigai Deepam shall be lit from this year onwards at Deepathoon also. It is the duty of the jurisdictional police to ensure that the direction of this Court is complied with. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City shall see to it that no one comes in the way of enforcement of this order.

43.W.P(MD)Nos.32317, 33112, 33197, 33724 are allowed. WP(MD)No.34051 of 2025 stands dismissed. I would be failing in my duty if I fail to appreciate Ms.J.Anandavalli, the learned counsel appearing for one of the impleaded parties, for filing a consolidated typed set which contain all