R ARIVANANTHAM
CHENNAI, MAR 3
In a significant development in the Tirupparankundram Deepathoon row, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has suggested that the State administration permit five persons — to be named by the court — to offer symbolic prayers for 15 minutes near the stone pillar atop the Tirupparankundram hill.
The suggestion came during the hearing of a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an earlier court direction relating to the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam atop the Deepathoon (stone pillar).
- Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) moots 15-minute symbolic prayer near stone pillar atop Tirupparankundram hill
- Justice G R Swaminathan says move would show “respect” to earlier Karthigai Deepam order
- Bench remarks Minister S Regupathy gave “a mischievous political spin” to the issue
- Contempt plea over Deepathoon lighting adjourned; hearing posted to March 4
Justice G R Swaminathan indicated that while the court was not insisting on the actual lighting of the lamp at this stage, symbolic prayers could be permitted if the government intended to demonstrate respect to its prior judicial orders.
On March 2, the judge observed, “I suggest that respect to the order passed by this court can be shown by permitting a group of five persons to be named by this court to go to the lower peak of the hillock where the Deepathoon lies so that the symbolic prayers can be offered.”
“I further indicate that this entire exercise can be confined to 15 minutes. This is only a suggestion and not a direction,” he added.
Minister’s Remarks Under Judicial Lens
During the proceedings, the Bench comprising Justice G R Swaminathan also took note of statements attributed to Tamil Nadu Minerals and Mines Minister S Regupathy, who had reportedly stated that the government would not permit the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at the Deepathoon.
The court remarked that “Regupathy has given a mischievous political spin to the turn of events.” It further clarified that whether the issuance of prohibitory orders by the district administration amounted to contempt was itself under judicial consideration.
“The rule of sub-judice will kick in. Let the minister bear this principle in mind,” Justice Swaminathan observed, while closing a sub-application that had sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the minister. The judge, however, made it clear that he would not hesitate to reopen the sub-application if the occasion demanded.
Collector’s Affidavit and Police Stand
Madurai District Collector K J Praveen Kumar filed an additional affidavit stating that prohibitory orders were promulgated on December 1, 2025, purely to prevent any potential law and order situation, and not to obstruct temple authorities from implementing the High Court’s earlier order to light the lamp atop the stone pillar.
The court observed that the police had “took shelter” behind the collector’s prohibitory order and had made it clear that they were merely enforcing the district administration’s directive.
The larger issue before the court remains whether the prohibitory order — issued in the backdrop of potential tensions — resulted in non-compliance with the High Court’s earlier direction regarding the Karthigai Deepam lighting.
Legal Tightrope
By suggesting a limited, time-bound symbolic prayer — explicitly clarifying that it was “only a suggestion and not a direction” — the court appeared to strike a calibrated balance between judicial authority, administrative concerns over law and order, and religious sentiment tied to the Tirupparankundram hill.
The matter has been adjourned to March 4 for further hearing, with the contempt petition continuing to remain under judicial scrutiny.
