MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday quashed the prohibitory order promulgated by the Madurai district collector under Section 163 BNSS (Sec 144 of CrPC) in Thiruparankundram on Wednesday, and directed the Madurai city police commissioner J Loganathan to ensure full protection to the petitioners and their associates to light Karthigai Deepam on the Deepathoon atop the hill as directed.
Justice GR Swaminathan passed the order on Thursday evening, a few hours after a division bench comprising justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan upheld his order dated December 3, directing Rama Ravikumar, who filed a contempt petition, to light the Deepam on the Deepathoon with CISF protection.
The prohibitory order was passed only to nullify the directions given by the court so that police would have a convenient reason to defy the court’s order, Justice Swaminathan observed. “When the Constitutional Court had declared the rights of the parties, the duty of the district administration as well as the jurisdictional police is to assist and aid in its enforcement. If the officers are allowed to defy court’s orders in this fashion, it will lead to anarchy. Such a situation is impermissible and must be nipped in the bud,” the judge said.
Since the prohibitory order issued by the collector overreaches the order passed by the court, it stands quashed, he added.
Earlier, the division bench, which heard a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) filed by the Madurai district collector and city police commissioner challenging the order passed in the contempt petition, questioned the propriety of the prohibitory order.
“We fail to understand that when there is specific order by the high court to permit the petitioner and 10 others to light the Deepam at the Deepathoon, how this prohibitory order can be put against them and whether the executive order passed under Section 163 of BNSS will prevail over the judicial order passed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to be decided,” the judges observed.
Perusing the files relating to the issuance of prohibitory order, the judges further said, “It is very obvious that Section 163 BNSS order is passed prior to the judicial order or the records are manipulated after this court calls for the original file.”
They also rejected the objections raised by the state with respect to the use of CISF personnel to provide protection to the petitioner. “The situation has arisen in which the state police are unable to carry the constitution mandate. There is no illegality in taking the assistance of the central force for the purpose if the circumstances warrant,” they said. The single judge’s decision to entrust the responsibility of enforcing his order to the petitioners does not amount to altering or modifying the earlier order and cannot be faulted with, since the temple authorities failed to implement the order, the judges added.
Holding that the LPA has been filed with ulterior motive to preempt contempt action, the judges dismissed it.
The state’s appeal against the single judge’s main order dated December 1 is yet to be heard. Meanwhile, a senior counsel representing the dargah also told the court that the dargah is also planning to challenge the order.
How the events unfolded
October 28: Rama Ravikumar sends representation to Thiruparankundram Subramaniya Swamy temple administration to light Karthigai Deepam on the Deepathoon near the Sikandar Badusha Dargah atop Thiruparankundram hill
November 3: Authorities reject his request, saying lamp would be lit at the usual place – the Deepa Mandapam near Uchipillaiyar temple on the hill
November 7: Rama Ravikumar files plea in HC
November 13: Justice Swaminathan seeks counter from temple administration
November 16 to 19: Three more petitions filed seeking the same relief
November 19: HC impleads ASI, dargah
November 24: HR&CE, TN Waqf Board impleaded
December 1: HC directs temple’s executive officer to light Deepam at Deepathoon also from this year onwards
December 2: EO files appeal
December 3: Day of Karthigai Deepam festival. Rama Ravikumar moves contempt plea at 1 pm; plea heard at 4.30 pm; EO, CoP summoned to appear through video conference
5 pm: Additional Advocate General says contempt premature
6.07 pm: Judge directs Ravikumar to light deepam with CISF protection, State takes measures to file LPA