MADURAI: The Tamil Nadu government on Friday told the Madurai Bench of the Madras HC that there was no evidence before the single judge to show that the stone pillar atop the Thiruparankundram hill was indeed a lamp pillar (deepathoon) used for the purpose of lighting the Karthigai Deepam.
Advocate General PS Raman, representing the Madurai collector, made the argument before a bench of Justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan which was hearing a batch of appeals filed against the order passed by Justice G R Swaminathan on December 1, directing the executive officer of the Thiruparankundram Subramaniya Swamy temple to light the Karthigai Deepam on the said deepathoon, along with the usual places, from this year. The dispute gives rise to the question of whether there is really a ‘deepathoon’ on the hilltop, Raman argued.
Taking the HC through the judgments of various courts on the issue, Raman said the Karthigai Deepam has been lit on the Uchipillaiyar Kovil Mandapam for the past 100 years.
‘Article 226 can’t be used to change customary practices’
There was no proof before the single judge to show that the stone pillar, near the Sikandar Badusha Dargah on the hilltop, was indeed a deepathoon and that the deepam has been traditionally lit on it, he contended. It is understandable if a custom had been broken by the authorities, but Article 226 (Power of HCs to issue writs) of the Constitution cannot be used to change a customary practice which has been in existence for decades, Raman submitted. He also questioned the single judge’s observation that traditions have been abandoned and the temple has to restore them, saying there was no factual basis behind the observation.
Senior Counsel G Masilamani, who represented the executive officer of the temple, said the petitioner Rama Ravikumar had no legal right to make such a demand. Referring to a judgment in a similar matter in 1996, Masilamani noted that the single judge had left it to the authorities to decide whether the place of lighting the deepam needs to be changed. The executive officer had considered the petitioner’s representation and took the decision that the deepam should be lit on the usual location — Uchipillaiyar temple mandapam.
He also contended that the pillar is actually only a one-foot-wide and eight-foot-tall granite pillar unsuitable for the purpose of lighting the Deepam. If the petitioner’s request is accepted and Karthigai Deepam is lit on the said pillar, will the dargah withstand the heat? Will it be safe, he asked.
When the judges asked if he or the executive officer personally examined the pillar, the counsel answered in the negative. To the judges’ query that was it not for the authorities to confirm if it’s a deepathoon, Masilamani pointed out that it is the petitioners’ claim and therefore, the onus is on them to prove. Similar submissions were made by senior counsel R Shunmugasundaram, who appeared on behalf of HR&CE department. He said the single judge’s order has to be overturned as it did not follow two division bench judgments on the issue. Around 4.30 pm, the judges paused the hearing and adjourned it to Monday.