{"id":81542,"date":"2026-01-08T10:44:09","date_gmt":"2026-01-08T05:14:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=81542"},"modified":"2026-01-08T10:44:09","modified_gmt":"2026-01-08T05:14:09","slug":"madras-hc-thiruparankundram-ruling-why-security-concerns-were-rejected","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/madras-hc-thiruparankundram-ruling-why-security-concerns-were-rejected\/","title":{"rendered":"Madras HC Thiruparankundram Ruling: Why Security Concerns Were Rejected"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><b>Thiruparankundram Ruling Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Madras High Court resolved the dispute over lighting the <\/span><b>Karthigai Deepam lamp<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> at Thiruparankundram hill by permitting the ritual to proceed, while barring public participation.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Division Bench dismissed the Tamil Nadu government\u2019s claims of potential communal unrest as unfounded, calling them an \u201cimaginary\u201d apprehension.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Background of the Thiruparankundram Dispute<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thiruparankundram Hill rises about 1,050 ft on the outskirts of Madurai.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">At its base stands the ancient Arulmigu Subramanian Swamy Cave Temple, long associated with Hindu worship.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Over centuries, Jain rock beds and caves were also carved on the hill.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Sufi Dargah at the Summit<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The summit houses the burial site of the Sufi saint <\/span><b>Sikkandar Badhusha<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, around which a dargah later developed.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">These overlapping histories gave the hill <\/span><b>multiple identities<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, including <\/span><b><i>\u201cSamanar Hill<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d for its Jain links and \u201c<\/span><b><i>Sikkandar Hill<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d after the saint.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because of its shared religious significance, the hill often requires police deployment during festivals, when access and movement become contentious.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Early Legal Settlement (1920\u20131923)<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A civil suit filed in 1920 by the temple Devasthanam claimed ownership of the entire hill.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In 1923, the trial court ruled that:\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Most of the unoccupied hill and pilgrim path belonged to the temple;\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The topmost peak, the area around the mosque, Nellithope, and the steps leading to it were Muslim property\u2014an arrangement that underpins later disputes.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Earlier Disputes at Thiruparankundram<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Recurring Litigation Over Ritual Practices<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; Legal disputes over Thiruparankundram have persisted for decades, reflecting sensitivities around ritual practices and shared access to the hill.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Flagstaff and Animal Sacrifice Controversies<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; In 2021, a dispute arose over replacing a wooden flagstaff at the dargah with an iron one.\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In early 2025, an attempt to perform animal sacrifice at the hilltop led to litigation; a three-judge Bench prohibited it, noting the hill\u2019s status as a protected monument under the Archaeological Survey of India rules.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>History of Restrictions on Lamp Lighting<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; Court records show that attempts to light lamps near the summit were stopped by authorities in the 19th and early 20th centuries, citing lack of established custom and public order concerns.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>High Court Directions in the 1990s<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; The issue resurfaced in 1994 when volunteers sought to light the Karthigai Deepam at the peak.\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In 1996, the High Court directed that the Deepam be lit at the Uchipillaiyar Temple mandapam, permitting alternate locations only if they were at least 15 metres away from the dargah, the flight of steps, and the Nellithope area.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Present Dispute<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; The current case revisits this long-standing issue, focusing specifically on the lighting of a festival lamp at the hilltop under tightly regulated conditions.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Trigger for the 2025 Thiruparankundram Dispute<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Petition to Light the Karthigai Deepam<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; In late November 2025, a group of worshippers approached the Madras High Court seeking permission to light the Karthigai Deepam on December 3 at a stone pillar on Thiruparankundram, locally known as the \u201c<\/span><b><i>Deepathoon<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Single Judge\u2019s Order<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; A Single Judge <\/span><b>allowed the plea<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, treating it as restoration of a religious practice.\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The court directed the temple management to light the lamp with police assistance, noting that Karthigai is a festival of lights celebrated beyond temple interiors.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">When the temple\u2019s Executive Officer flagged law-and-order concerns, the Single Judge initiated contempt proceedings and permitted a small team to climb the hill under security cover.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>State Government\u2019s Objections<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The State government and the <\/span><b>Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> challenged the order, arguing that disputes over custom and usage must be decided under the HR&amp;CE Act, not via writ proceedings.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The State questioned whether the Deepathoon had religious significance at all, suggesting it could be a survey marker or a remnant linked to Jain usage.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Citing crowd control and public peace concerns, police imposed prohibitory orders. As a result, the lamp was not lit on the festival day.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Appeals Filed<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The State, the HR&amp;CE Department, and representatives of the dargah appealed the Single Judge\u2019s order, bringing the matter before a Division Bench for final resolution.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>What the Madras High Court Division Bench Ruled<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Deepathoon Recognised as Ritual Structure<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; The Division Bench held that the structure in question was indeed a Deepathoon, noting its carved cavity suitable for oil and wicks, and rejected the State\u2019s claim that it was merely a survey marker.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Rejection of Law-and-Order Fears<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; The court dismissed the administration\u2019s security concerns as an \u201cimaginary ghost,\u201d observing that allowing a small team of temple officials to access the hill once a year was manageable.\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It remarked that any disturbance would arise only if \u201csponsored by the State itself.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Restricted Performance of the Ritual<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; While upholding the ritual, the Bench modified the earlier order by restricting the lighting of the lamp to a limited Devasthanam team, with no public access to the hilltop.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400; text-align: justify;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Coordination and Heritage Safeguards<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; The District Collector was directed to coordinate the exercise, ensuring compliance with conditions set by the Archaeological Survey of India to protect the monument.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Source:<\/b> <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/thiruparankundram-madras-hc-tn-ceremonial-lamp-lighting-10458787\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">IE<\/a> | <a href=\"https:\/\/timesofindia.indiatimes.com\/city\/chennai\/madras-hc-trashes-tns-fears-upholds-order-to-light-deepam-atop-thiruparankundram-hill\/articleshow\/126381300.cms\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">ToI<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Madras HC Thiruparankundram ruling rejected Tamil Nadu\u2019s security concerns and allowed ceremonial lamp lighting with restrictions, clarifying law, order, and heritage safeguards.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":81555,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[60,4621,22,59],"class_list":{"0":"post-81542","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","8":"tag-mains-articles","9":"tag-thiruparankundram-ruling","10":"tag-upsc-current-affairs","11":"tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs","12":"no-featured-image-padding"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81542","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=81542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81542\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/81555"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=81542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=81542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=81542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}