In a setback for the DMK government, a Division Bench of Madras High Court has refused to stay the contempt proceedings before a single judge with regard to the non-compliance of lighting ‘Karthigai Deepam’ at a stone pillar atop the Thiruparankundram hillock, adjoining a 14th century dargah, claimed to be ‘deepathoon’, pillar for lighting deepam.
Justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan, hearing a batch of appeals challenging the December 1 order of Justice GR Swaminathan, directing lighting of deepam at the stone pillar declined to stay the contempt proceedings before the single judge. The Bench also rejected the plea to exempt the chief secretary and the additional DGP from personal appearance and directed to approach the single judge.
Justice Swaminathan had directed the authorities of the Subramania Swami temple, at the hillock’s foothill, to light the deepam at the stone pillar so as to assert the property right of the temple over the area adjoining the Sikkandar Badusha Dargah, in addition to the customary place at the Uchi Pillayar temple in the middle of the hillock, right above the Murugan temple below. The single judge had said that the practice of lighting deepam at the stone pillar was a tradition that had been abandoned.
Assailing the December 1 order, senior counsel Vikas Singh, appearing for the state authorities, submitted that while the petitioner, Rama Ravikumar, had only asked for the temple authorities to light deepam atop the hillock, the single judge had granted a relief more than asked for.
The Dargah was built after Sikkandar Badusha, ruler of the short-lived Madurai Sultanate, killed after being defeated by the forces of the Vijayanagara empire in the late 14th century. Territorial dispute over the dargah and the temple had reached the Privy council in London, which gave its ruling in 1931, demarcating the boundaries of each. The hillock also houses Jain caves and stone beds besides inscriptions.
Refusing to intervene in the contempt proceedings against the Madurai district collector, police SP and temple executive officer, the Bench questioned the nature of the stone pillar. Disputing it as ‘depathoon’, the counsel for the temple EO argued that the stone pillar was a Jain-era structure dating back to 3 and 4th century CE and that there was no record or tradition of lighting deepam on it. Earlier, it had maintained it could be a survey pillar.
Claiming territorial ownership of the area where the pillar is located, counsel for the dargah and the Waqf Board, argued that the land has to be restored. When the Bench suggested whether peace talks could be ordered to resolve the issue, the Waqf side expressed its readiness while the petitioners were not. Then the Bench said “The month of Karthigai is over and Margazhi has commenced leaving more than 360 days for the next deepam.” Further hearing has been posted for tomorrow (Wednesday).