Particle.news
Download on the App Store

Madras High Court Reserves Verdict in Thiruparankundram Deepam Dispute

State lawyers questioned the pillar’s origin, urging HR&CE adjudication under Section 63.

Overview

  • - A Division Bench of Justices G. Jayachandran and K. K. Ramakrishnan reserved orders after multi-day hearings on appeals against a single judge’s direction permitting a Karthigai lamp at a stone pillar near the hilltop dargah.
  • - Advocate-General P. S. Raman said there is no empirical proof the pillar is a deepathoon, noted no lamp has been lit there to date, and cited a 1920 order recording the dargah as the only hilltop structure.
  • - The State argued that established usage questions must be decided by HR&CE authorities under Section 63, contending a writ cannot alter long-standing practice.
  • - Petitioners, represented by senior advocates S. Sriram and P. Valliappan, called hilltop lighting an essential practice, opposed being sent to HR&CE citing perceived bias, and pointed to the existing lamp tradition at the Uchi Pillaiyar temple on the lower peak.
  • - HR&CE materials referenced scholarship suggesting the pillar could be a Jain structure, while dargah counsel raised access and harmony concerns, leaving the court to decide whether the single-judge order stands or the issue goes to statutory forums.