NEW DELHI: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging Madras High Court’s January 6 order which allowed the lighting of a lamp on Thirupparankundram hill subject to clearance from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and police.
In his plea, Ravikumar, the original petitioner, has challenged the HC’s directive as an unlawful dilution of binding civil court decrees recognising the Arulmigu Subramania Swamy Temple’s ownership and control of the hill, and as an impermissible judicial intrusion into an essential religious practice.
Ravikumar contended that although the HC acknowledged the temple’s right to light the Deepam at the Deepathoon, it rendered that right conditional by subjecting it to administrative discretion.
He contended that the HC exceeded its jurisdiction by imposing fresh substantive restrictions. “The decisions concerning where and by whom the Deepam is lit fall within the temple’s internal religious management and denominational autonomy, protected under Article 26 of the Constitution, and cannot be made subject to statutory authorities in the absence of a clear legislative mandate,” Ravikumar said in his appeal.
On January 23, the top court sought a response from the Centre, the Tamil Nadu government and others on a separate plea seeking directions on the ASI’s takeover of the Thirupparankundram temple and daily lamp lighting on top of the ‘Deepathoon’, following a petition filed by an organisation called the Hindu Dharma Parishad.
The Parishad has sought the apex court’s direction that on the day of Karthigai, the entire Thirupparankundram Hill should be lit with lamps and devotees of Muruga be allowed to worship.
On January 6, a division bench of the Madras HC had made it clear that the spot on which the stone pillar is located belongs to the Sri Subramania Swamy Temple.
On December 1 last year, a single bench of the HC had allowed petitioner Rama Ravikumar to light the Karthigai Deepam on the ‘Deepathoon’. The TN government went on appeal, in which the division bench gave its ruling on January 6.
