Madurai: In a fresh twist to an increasingly volatile religious dispute in Tamil Nadu, the Tamil Nadu government has approached the Supreme Court of India (SC) challenging a recent order by the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) that permitted devotees to light the ritual lamp (Karthigai Deepam) at a contentious location on Thiruparankundram Hill.
The order — allowing the lighting of a lamp atop the ancient stone pillar known as Deepathoon — has ignited tensions between religious communities, sparked protests, and raised serious questions about heritage, communal harmony, and the rule of law.
As the matter heads to India’s apex court, what lies beneath this legal battle is not just a contest over ritual — but a decades-old dispute over ownership, history, and communal coexistence on a hill revered by both Hindus and Muslims.
Historical & Legal Background of Thiruparankundram Hill Deepam Row
Thiruparankundram Hill, located in Madurai district of Tamil Nadu, is home to two major religious landmarks: the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple (dedicated to Lord Murugan) and the Thiruparankundram Dargah (a 14th-century Sufi shrine dedicated to Sultan Sikandar Badusha).
While both religious sites have co-existed for centuries, legal records trace a longstanding ownership dispute over various portions of the hill. A 1923 civil court decree, subsequently upheld by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1931, concluded that the Muslim caretakers (hukdars) held ownership only over the mosque, its flagstaff, steps cut into the rock, and a small area referred to as Nellithope.
The remainder of the hill — including the unoccupied sections — was held by the temple.
On the basis of these historical findings, recent court rulings have leaned toward affirming the temple’s title over most of the hill, except the dargah’s defined precincts.
Thiruparankundram Hill Deepam Row: From Tradition to Legal Contestation
For generations, the annual ritual of lighting the “Karthigai Deepam” festival lamp was conducted near the Uchipillaiyar temple — a safe distance from the dargah and atop the hill but not at the Deepathoon pillar. This arrangement had helped preserve communal peace, given the hill’s mixed religious character.
However, in recent years — amid petitions by certain Hindu individuals and organisations — there has been a push to restore the older ritual practice of lighting at Deepathoon, asserting that the stone lamp pillar lies on temple-owned land.
The Madras High Court’s 2025 Verdict on Thiruparankundram Hill Deepam Row
On 1 December 2025, a Single Judge of the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), ruled in favour of the petitioners seeking to light the lamp at Deepathoon, observing that:
- Lighting the Deepam on a Deepathoon/pillar is in keeping with Tamil tradition; the very purpose of a Deepathoon is to light a lamp.
- The hill’s unoccupied portions — including Deepathoon — belong to the temple; the dargah’s rights do not extend to that pillar or nearby area.
- By rejecting the objections (including those from the dargah trustees and the Waqf Board), the court held that there was no need for a fresh demarcation suit since prior rulings had already settled the title.
The court directed the temple administration to permit lamp-lighting at Deepathoon from that festival onwards, quashing the executive officer’s prior decision to restrict the Deepam to the conventional location.
It also ordered the police to grant protection so devotees could perform the ritual safely.
Government Defiance, Contempt & Escalation
Despite the High Court order, state authorities did not comply. On the eve of the scheduled lamp-lighting, the temple lit the Deepam at the traditional Uchipillaiyar temple location — bypassing the Deepathoon.
In response, the court initiated contempt proceedings. The judge castigated the state for “wilful disobedience,” describing the act as a direct challenge to judicial authority:
> “The state administration has decided to cock a snook at this court’s order… Defying the order would sound the death knell of democracy itself.”
Further, the court ruled that the petitioner (and up to 10 others) could attempt to climb the hill under escort by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) to light the lamp — if local authorities continued to obstruct the lawful ritual.
Even after a division-bench review and reaffirmation of the verdict, the government’s appeal was dismissed, with the bench observing that the appeal appeared to be a pre-emptive move to dodge contempt rather than a bona fide challenge to the legal or factual basis of the order.
State Moves to Supreme Court
Faced with repeated judicial censures and the potential for law-and-order breakdown, the state authorities filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the Madras HC order.
During oral mention before a bench headed by the Surya Kant (CJI) and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, the court declined the immediate request for urgent hearing but agreed to list the matter for regular hearing.
Counsel for the devotees criticised the state’s move as a theatrical attempt to stall compliance, accusing it of manufacturing unnecessary drama rather than raising substantive legal objections.
Communal & Political Fallout
The dispute has unleashed a wave of protests, detentions, and confrontations:
- Members of Hindu organisations attempted to access the hill to light the lamp, leading to clashes with police. Several were detained, including prominent political figures.
- The authorities imposed prohibitory orders to prevent large gatherings, citing potential threats to public order.
- The controversy has revived old wounds about communal coexistence on a shared heritage site. Critics argue that reopening ritual claims over Deepathoon threatens to upset the delicate balance between the temple and the dargah that existed for decades without major conflict.
- Political implications are significant, especially as state elections approach. The ruling bloc and opposition are exchanging charges of communal polarisation, forcing a complex interplay of religion, law, and politics.
Importance of Thiruparankundram Hill Deepam Case
Religious pluralism and heritage: Thiruparankundram Hill — with its temple and dargah — has long stood as a symbol of coexistence. The verdict and ensuing dispute test the ability of courts and governments to safeguard plural heritage while respecting religious rights.
Rule of law vs executive action: The confrontation underscores a core tension: Can executive or administrative action override a court order simply because of potential public disorder? The High Court’s contempt order and the SC petition highlight deep constitutional questions.
Historicity vs reinterpretation: The litigants argue that re-asserting the right to light the lamp at Deepathoon is not an innovation but a restoration of ancient custom, backed by historical legal verdicts. The outcome may set a precedent for similar disputes elsewhere.
Communal and political ramifications: Any ruling at the Supreme Court will likely reverberate beyond Madurai — affecting communal relations, electoral politics, and the management of shared religious sites across India.
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court will examine the SLP filed by Tamil Nadu — likely delving into historical ownership records, previous court decrees, constitutional rights to freedom of religion (Articles 25 & 26), and implications for public order.
Until the apex court renders its verdict, tension in Madurai is expected to continue. Security measures remain heightened.
In the longer term, the case may prompt renewed scrutiny of how heritage sites shared by multiple faiths are governed and how rituals tied to land-ownership are adjudicated in India’s pluralistic context.
