Madras High Court Permits Lighting Of Lamp At Thiruparakundram Hills, Says It Won't Affect Rights Of Dargah Or Muslims

Justice GR Swaminathan primarily observed that the deepathoon was not located in the area that belonged to the Muslims and thus lighting the lamp would not affect the rights of the community. At the same time, the court added that not allowing the lighting of lamps would affect the rights of the temple and the devotees.

“The balance of convenience can also be noted. By lighting the lamp at Deepathoon, the rights of the Dargha or the Muslims will not in any way be affected. The Dargah management has not demonstrated as to how they will be affected if the lamp is lit at the Deepathoon. It is not their case that Deepathoon is within the Dargha campus. On the other hand, if the lamp is not lit at Deepathoon, there is always a possibility that the rights of the temple may be jeopardised,” the court observed.

The court also criticised the conduct of the temple management in not taking steps to protect the rights of the temple or the devotees. The court further observed that the temple management had failed to discharge its duty.

“The mandate of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the above suo motu writ petition is that the temple management has the duty to protect its properties. Failure to maintain vigilance and that too eternally will lead to eventual loss of the right itself. The entire hill is a sacred one. On account of invasion and occupation, portions have been lost. At least what remains should be preserved. This is what the petitioners pray. I have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the temple management has a legal duty in the matter and that duty has not been discharged,” the court said.

The court was hearing a batch of pleas in connection with the lighting of Karthigai Deepam on the Deepathoon, located in one of the peaks of the Thiruparakundram Hills. One petition was also filed opposing the relief.

The plea was challenged on the ground that the issue could be solved only in a suit for demarcation, that the devotees did not have locus standi to maintain the present petitions, that lighting the lamp at deepathoon was not a customary practice, that a similar prayer was already negated by the court in 2014, that the bona fide of the petitioner was questionable and that granting permission would be contrary to the provisions of the Places of Worship Act.

Tracing the history of litigations concerning the hill, the court noted that in 1923 decree, the court had clearly held that the temple management was the owner and in possession of the whole of Tirupparakundram Hill and the giri veedhi, except the Nellithope, the new mandapam, the flight of the steps leading from the nellithope up to the mosque and the top of the rock on which the mosque and the flagstaff of the Muhammadans stood.

The court noted that the petitioners were not seeking to light the lamp in the area belonging to the muslims, but only wanted to light it in the deepathoon, which was atop a lower peak, separate from the peak where the mosque was situated.

Though the respondents argued that lighting of the lamp at the deepathoon was not a customary practice, the court held that lighting of the lamp atop a hill during the month of Karthigai was a custom among Tamil people, and the devotees were justified in demanding that the temple management resume or restore the tradition. The court added that it was not just a matter of custom and that it was imperative for the temple's title by not permitting any encroachments.

“The 1923 judgment has clarified who owns what. But that did not deter the mosque trustees from disturbing the status quo. It is therefore necessary that the temple management remains vigilant throughout to foil any attempt to encroach on its property. This can be done only by regular and periodical assertion of title. It is not a matter of religious tradition alone. At least, for the sake of protecting its property, the temple management is obliged to light the festival lamp at the Deepathoon,” the court said.

“Devasthanam/ has the duty to maintain traditions. If traditions have been abandoned, the temple management has to restore them so long as constitutional morality is not breached. Lighting a lamp is a sacred act. It cannot offend anybody's sensibilities,” the court added.

Thus, the court ruled in favour of lighting the lamp and ordered that the Karthigai Deepam be lit from this year onwards. The court also directed the jurisdictional police to ensure that the court's orders were complied with and that no one came in the way of the enforcement of the order.

Case Title: Rama Ravikumar v. The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 457

Case No: W.P(MD) Nos 32317, 33112, 33197, 33724, 34051 of 2025

 Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment