Back
BEFORE THE
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
Versus
The District Collector,
W.P(MD)Nos.32317, 33112, 33197, 33724 and 34051 of 2025 and WMP(MD) Nos.25422, 26867 & 26906 of 2025
Decided On :
The respondent argues that the site for lighting the Deepam has been traditionally near the Uchi Pillaiyar Temple for over a century, and this practice is well established (!) . They contend that the petitioners lack the legal right or interest to demand a different site, as ownership and possession of Deepathoon belong to the temple based on prior decrees (!) . The respondent emphasizes that disputes over boundaries and ownership with the Dargha require civil litigation, not writ proceedings (!) . They also suggest that the petitioners' motives may be communal and could disturb public peace (!) . Finally, the respondent asserts that the temple has the legal and customary right to decide the site for lighting, and the court should uphold these rights without infringing on other religious interests (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of petitions for karthigai deepam lighting. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. filing of counter affidavits. (Para 3) |
| 3. key question on lighting the festival lamp. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. counsel arguments review. (Para 6) |
| 5. opposition to lighting at deepathoon. (Para 7) |
| 6. historical context and prior disputes. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 7. findings on ownership and possession. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 8. importance of common law in disputes. (Para 20 , 23) |
| 9. rights assertion by temple management. (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 30) |
| 10. need for protection of sacred properties. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 11. worshipper’s rights and legal standpoint. (Para 34) |
| 12. court’s ruling on the lighting of the lamp. (Para 36 , 39) |
| 13. final order on the karthigai deepam lighting. (Para 42 , 43) |
ORDER :
Rama.Ravikumar, who claims to be a devout follower of Lord Muruga applied to the Executive Officer of Arulmigu Subramania Swamy Temple, Thirupparankundram, seeking permission to light the Karthigai Deepam for this year. In response thereto, the Executive Officer of the Temple informed the petitioner that as per the established custom of the temple, Karthigai Deepam would be lit in the Deepa Mandapam near the Uchi Pillaiyar Temple that is located halfway up the hill. Challenging the said communication, WP(MD)No.32317 of 2025 came to be filed. The petitioner wants this Court to direct the temple management to light the Karthigai Deepam on the Deepathoon (Stone Lamp Pillar) which is located on one of the peaks of Thirupparankundram hill.
2.After the filing of WP(MD)No.32317 of 2025, few other writ petitions were also filed for the very same relief. Impleading petitions were filed, some supporting the claim that the festival lamp must be lit at the Deepathoon and some contending that the lamp should be lit only near Uchi Pillaiyar Temple. WP(MD)No.34051 of 2025 has been filed opposing the lighting of the lamp at the hilltop.
3.Counter affidavits had been filed by the Commissioner, HR&CE, the Executive Officer of the temple and the Managing Trustee of the Dharga.
4.Heard the learned counsel on either side at considerable length. Written submissions were filed and the learned counsel took me through their contents.
5.The only question that calls for consideration is whether the temple management can be directed to light the festival lamp at Deepathoon.
6.After taking me through the pleadings as well as the materials enclosed in the typed set of papers, the learned counsel for the writ petitioners (this expression would not include the petitioner in WP(MD)No.34051 of 2025) submitted that direction as sought for may be issued.
7.This prayer has been fiercely and vehemently contested by the State, the temple management as well as the Dargha management and the Waqf Board. Their objections can be summarized in the following terms :
a) Thirupparankundram Hill houses not only the temple dedicated to Lord Subramaniya but also Sikkandar Badhusah Dharga. Both are ancient religious institutions. Just as the temple is held sacred by the Hindus, the Dharga is held sacred by the Muslims. While the Subramaniya Swamy Temple is located at the foot of the hill, the Dharga is located at the top. There is another temple dedicated to Lord Shiva and it is located in the midway. There are tombs situated in an area called Nellithoppu which is mostly a flat surface below the hilltop. Disputes arose between the temple management and the trustees of the Dargha. They were the subject matter of as many as four civil suits ie., O.S No.4 of 1920 on the file of the First Additional Sub Judge of Madura, O.S No.111 of 1958 on the file of the Sub Court, Madurai, O.S No.506 of 1975 on the file of the Sub Court, Madurai and O.S No.39 of 2011 (447 of 2004) on the file of the District Munsif, Thirumangalam. The issue can be finally resolved, if at all, only in a suit for demarcation. Unless the respective boundaries are clearly demarcated on ground, it is not possible to adjudicate the issue raised in the writ petitions. In a
The temple management has a statutory duty to light the Karthigai Deepam at Deepathoon, confirming their rights over the site and the protection of religious customs as defined in prior judgments.
The court affirmed the right to light Karthigai Deepam at Deepathoon, emphasizing communal harmony and overriding state concerns over public order, based on established customary practices.
State officials must comply with judicial orders related to the right of worship, or face contempt proceedings.
Customary rights to access religious sites must be substantiated and adjudicated by relevant authorities, as per Section 63(e) of the Act, rather than settled in a writ petition.
Point of Law : Section 31A of Act deals with formation of Temple Advisory Committees.
The court ruled that the Udayasthamana Pooja's status as a religious practice must be established in civil court, and the Managing Committee's decisions regarding rituals are not subject to judicial ....
The High Court refrained from granting any declaration as to who is the actual person who has a right to exercise the shebait rights or any other right relatable to the temple. The Court left open th....
The court prioritized the uninterrupted conduct of the 'khrp' festival while acknowledging ongoing disputes over temple management, emphasizing the need for peace and order.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
