Madras HC Upholds Single Judge Directive And Slams State Of Tamil Nadu

s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave, Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi,

A 82, Defence Enclave,

Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera,

Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

It is definitely entirely in the fitness of things that the Madras High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Executive Officer, Arulmigu Subramania Swamy Temple vs Rama Ravikumar in W.A(MD)Nos.3188, 3189, 3204, 3211, 3212, 3213, 3217, 3218, 3219, 3220, 3221, 3222, 3223, 3225, 3226, 3227, 3229, 3230, 3231, 3232 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD)Nos.19509, 19508, 19712, 19800, 19832, 19831, 19871, 19870, 19873, 19882 of 2025 that has been pronounced as recently as on 06.01.2026 while taking potshots at the Tamil Nadu State Government for casting aspersions that allowing representatives of Devasthanam to light the lamp will cause public disturbance has upheld a Single Judge’s decision to allow the lighting of a Karthigai Deepam at a stone pillar on the lower of two peaks atop the Thiruparankundram hillock which houses both the Arulmigu Subramania Swamy and the Sikandar Badhusha Dargah. It must be noted that the Division Bench commented that the State’s apprehensions of public peace disturbances that may ensue if the lamp is lit, is nothing but an imaginary ghost created conveniently, which has created mistrust between communities. Most damningly, the Division Bench while sharply castigating the Tamil Nadu State Government has also held that, “We find that the apprehension expressed by the district administration regarding probability of disturbance of public peace is nothing but an imaginary ghost created by them for their convenience sake and to put one community against another community under suspicion and constant mistrust.”

We also need to take into account that the Division Bench also criticized the submission made by the Waqf Board that the stone pillar belongs to the Dargah. The Court also held clearly that the temple devasthanam (management) must light the lamp at the stone pillar namely the Deepathoon. The Division Bench thus did not find any merit in the State’s reservations about whether the stone pillar in focus is a Deepathoon.

By the way, this landmark verdict was passed on appeals challenging a judgment that had been passed by Single-Judge Justice GR Swaminathan after some temple devotees moved petitions seeking to light a Karthigai Deepam at a stone pillar atop the Thiruparankundram hillock. The Division Bench also further observed that religious practices always have reasons and that the practice of lighting deepam at elevated place is there for all Hindu devotees at the foothill to see and worship. It was also held by the Court that when such a customary practice is in place, there is no plausible reason for temple management to not comply with devotees’ request to light the lamp.

At the very outset, this pragmatic, pertinent, progressive and persuasive common judgment authored by both Hon’ble Mr Justice Dr G Jayachandran and Hon’ble Mr Justice KK Ramakrishnan sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “God said Let there be light and there was light”

It is the famous biblical phrase from Genesis 1:3 where God speaks light into existence, symbolizing creation, hope, and divine power.”

To put things in perspective, the Division Bench envisages in para 2 that, “The controversy under consideration is the judgement of the High Court Bench of Single Judge, which directed the Executive Officer of the Thiruparangundram Devasthanam to lit lamp at the stone lamp pillar in the hill on the full moon evening of the Tamil Karthigai month. The State represented by the District Collector and Superintendent of Police apprehends that the implementation of this order will create disturbance to the public peace. The Hindu Religious and Charitable Department (hereinafter referred to as 'HR & CE Department') says, the order is against ‘Agama Shastra’ and some of the adversaries say, it is a new custom invented by the Court.”

As we see, the Division Bench then observes in para 3 that, “A dispute, which could have been resolved amicably through dialogues, unfortunately had been escalated by some disgruntled elements. Attempts to demoralize and demean the judiciary with the might of power, had also surfaced. We are thankful to the Learned Senior Counsel Mr. T.Mohan appearing for one of the Appellants for his appropriate reminder to this Court ‘Fiat justitia ruat caelum’ – (Let Justice be done though the heavens fall).”

Do note, the Division Bench notes in para 4 that, “We must here also place on record that at the time of hearing the appeals, we thought that it is not late to explore the possibility of amicable settlement through Mediation. However, as the arguments proceeded, slowly we realized the inter-loppers, fence sitters and onlookers outside the ring are waiting to play the spoil game, since they gain as long as the animosity among the two communities continues.”

It would be instructive to note that the Division Bench hastens to add in para 8 noting that, “For a long time, Hindu Temples and structures of Hindu religion alone were along the foothill and on the hill. Rest of the hill remained unoccupied. Later Jain’s cave and its inscriptions were carved. This was followed by a Dharga of a Sufi Saint by name ‘Sikkandar Badhusha’. These structures are not of contemporaneous period. They were put up on the rocks of the hill at different place at different period, obviously, only much after the followers of Jainism and Islam came to this part of the country either as preachers or as invaders. Due to the presence of those structures which came later, the hill also identified by few as ‘Samanar Hill’ (Hill of Jains) or ‘Sikkandar Hill’ (After the Sufi Saint). Though a misconception prevails among a section of people that there are two hills in that terrain separated by a valley, from the statement of visitors and the notes of research scholars about this hill, it is clear that this is one hill consists of two peaks and few summits (flat surface on the rocks) at different levels. The Sikkandar Dharga, Kasi Viswanathar Temple, Nellithope, Jain Caves and rock beds and the Stone Pillar (Deepathoon) are few structures found around the hill. Trace of a ruined rectangular shape, man made construction, with brick and lime mortars found on the surface of a rock, and on another rock the stone pillar could be seen. They are separated by a deep cut water body (sunai). There are few more water bodies called ‘sunai’. It is not certain whether these water bodies (‘sunai’) ('sunai' in Tamil means 'water springs') are natural or man made. Nonetheless, records show that people revered the water bodies as ‘holy’.”

Most significantly, most remarkably and so also most forthrightly, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 140 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating precisely that, “(a)The reliefs sought in the present writ petitions not determined in the earlier litigations. Hence, the writ petitions are not hit by res judicata.

(b)Petition to the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department under Section 63(e) of the Act, is neither an alternate remedy nor an efficacious remedy.

(c)Till the end, the appellants have failed to produce formidable evidence to show that Agama Sastra of Saivites prohibits lighting lamp at a place which is not straight on top of the deity in Sanctum sanctorum; nor it is the case of the Devasthanam or the Government that lighting deepam is not a custom prevailing in Thirupankundram Hill.

(d)It is ridiculous and hard to believe the fear of the mighty State that by allowing representatives of the Devasthanam to light the lamp at the stone pillar near top of the hill located within its territory of devasthanam land, on a particular day in a year, will cause disturbance to public peace. Of course, it may happen only if such disturbance is sponsored by the State itself. We pray no State should stoop to that level to achieve their political agenda.

(e)The stone pillar with provision to light lamp, in Tamil called as ‘Deepathoon’. The location of the pillar is in the portion of the hill declared by a competent civil Court as property of the Devasthanam. The Waqf Board, as on date have no locus in this matter. For the first time in the course of argument in the intra Court appeals, on behalf of the Waqf a mischievous submission was made that the lamp pillar belongs to Dharga. This plea we would say, had deterred and added yet another reason for the other side to be skeptical about the offer made by the Waqf Board for Court monitoring mediation.

(f)This Court in W.P.No.18884 of 1994 had given liberty to the worshippers to seek change of place for lighting Deepam at any other part of the hill owned by the Devasthanam with restriction of 15 meters from the Dharga property to ensure safety to the property. The spirit of the direction is to ensure safety. Therefore, we clarify that the distance restriction suggested by the Learned Judge is not a sine quo non to fix the place of lighting the Deepam. The safety of the Dharga property alone is sine quo non while fixing the alternate or additional place of lighting the Deepam lamp.

(g)Being at vantage point, the stone Pillar called as Deepathoon, which is on the different rock summit and lower to the peak on which the Dharga located, is the ideal place to light Deepam. Religious practices always carry a purpose. The practice of lighting deepam at a elevated place during Karthikaideepam festival and other festivals is for the devotees at the foothill and its surrounding to see and worship.

(h)As Saint Thirumoolar say, the light is personification of Lord Shiva. When there is a custom of lighting lamp at the elevated place available and a place is available within the limits of Devasthanam property, there is no plausible reason for the Devasthanam to refuse to comply the wishes of its devotees, when such a request is not against morality or public policy. Ofcourse, any activity on the hill which is a protected site under the Statute, should be within the permissible limit as indicated by this Court in the earlier writ petition W.P.No. 2277 of 2025.

(i)At the risk of repetition, we reiterate again, the hill being declared as protected area under AMASR Act,1958, all are bound by the Act and Rules framed thereunder and the direction of this Court issued in W.P.(MD)No.2277 of 2025 vide order dated 10.10.2025 by Justice R.Vijakumar rendered on reference after the split verdict by the Division Bench.

(j)We find that the apprehension expressed by the District Administration regarding probability of disturbance to the public peace is nothing but an imaginary ghost created by them for their convenience sake and to put one community against other community under suspicion and constant mistrust. By allowing few persons from Devasthanam to the pillar for lighting the lamp and keep the devotees stay at the foothill and worship is not an un-manageable task. Projecting as if such congregation will cause disturbance to peace, stampede, disharmony among community etc., is either exposure of their incapacity to maintain law and order or hesitant to bring harmony among the communities.

(k)In our considered view the State through the District Administration should have taken this as an opportunity to bridge the difference between these two communities. They could have narrowed down the gap by peaceful and meaningful negotiation. Unfortunately, due to lack of conviction, all these years the peace meetings have paved way only for widening the mistrust. We hope, by implementing the below directions, which can be suitably modified whenever festival of respective community falls, then there will be only light and not any fight.”

Most rationally and as a corollary, the Division Bench then directs and holds in para 141 that, “In the result, the writ appeals are disposed of with the following directions:-

1) The Devastham must light the lamp at the Deepathoon. In addition to the prohibitions and restrictions as found in Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Acts and Rules, ASI shall impose conditions appropriate and necessary to preserve the monuments in the hill.

2) The Devasthanam through their team has to light the lamp in the Deepathoon (Annexure-B) on the event of Karthigaideepam festival falling in the Tamil month, Karthigai. No public shall be allowed to accompany the Devasthanam team and the number of the team members to be decided in consultation with the ASI and Police. The District Collector shall co-ordinate and supervise the event.”

It is worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 142 that, “As an epilogue, we thank and appreciate all the Learned Counsels, irrespective of their age and standing, for their utmost cooperation rendered to us during the hearing. The decorum observed by them inside the Court was also exemplary and heartening. The materials provided by them to understand the intrinsic nuances of the issue was of immense help for us to pen down this judgement to the best of our knowledge and ability.”

Finally, the Division Bench then concludes by directing and holding in para 143 that, “The writ appeals are disposed, accordingly. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.”