The Madras High Court on Monday (22 June 2026) orally suggested that the long-running dispute over the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at Thirupparankundram be brought to a close through dialogue, while questioning the State government’s reluctance to implement earlier judicial orders, as reported in LiveLaw.
A division bench comprising Justice N. Sathish Kumar and Justice M. Jothiraman was hearing appeals filed by the State against various orders passed in contempt proceedings arising from the Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam controversy.
During the hearing, the bench noted that an earlier division bench had already upheld the order of a single judge permitting the lighting of the lamp at the deepathoon (stone pillar) located on the hill.
Observing that the implementation of the order would not adversely affect any party, the court questioned why the State continued to keep the dispute alive instead of working towards a resolution.
“Nobody is affected here. Division bench has asked authorities to do something. What’s difficult in that? Why do you want to keep this matter alive? You can sit together and give a quietus to this. There’s a division bench order. We have to see the interest of people there. They reside there. They know ground reality. Ask both sides to sit together, mediate and find a solution. Why don’t you be responsible counsels on both sides and see,” the bench orally remarked.
The observations came after the Tamil Nadu government informed the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Monday that it had filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court challenging the division bench judgment that upheld the single judge’s order permitting the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at the deepathoon on the Thirupparankundram hill. The submission was made before the bench of Justice N. Sathish Kumar and Justice M. Jothiraman during the hearing, as reported in Dinamalar.
Counsel appearing for the devotee-petitioner informed the court that a separate SLP had also been filed challenging a particular portion of the division bench judgment which directed temple authorities to take steps to light the lamp. According to the petitioner, that portion of the order could adversely affect the rights of devotees, prompting them to move the Supreme Court independently.
Taking note of the fact that appeals from both sides are now pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court adjourned the matter. The bench also extended the interim stay that had earlier been granted on various orders passed by the single judge during the contempt proceedings.
Background Of The Dispute
The controversy stems from a series of orders passed by the High Court in late 2025 concerning the traditional lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at Thirupparankundram.
On 1 December 2025, a single judge directed the management of the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple to light the lamp at 6 p.m. on December 3.
When a contempt petition was subsequently filed on December 3 alleging that no arrangements had been made to comply with the order, the court permitted the petitioner-devotee and ten other persons to light the lamp themselves. The court also directed the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) to provide protection to the devotees.
However, citing concerns over law and order, the District Collector imposed prohibitory orders under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the area.
The following day, while hearing the contempt proceedings, the court quashed the prohibitory order, observing that it had been issued solely to prevent implementation of the judicial direction.
When the matter came up again on December 9, the court directed the State Chief Secretary and the Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) to personally appear before it. The court also impleaded the Union Home Secretary and issued statutory notice to Deputy Commissioner of Police Inigo Divyan.
Senior officials subsequently filed affidavits stating that they held the court in the highest regard and that the prohibitory orders had been issued solely to maintain public order.
As the proceedings continued, the court suggested a middle path, proposing that five individuals nominated by the court be allowed to reach the lower peak of the hillock where the deepathoon is located and offer symbolic prayers for fifteen minutes.
Division Bench Had Earlier Criticised State Authorities
In a significant development on 6 January 2026, a division bench of the Madras High Court upheld the single judge’s order permitting the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp.
While doing so, the bench strongly criticised the State administration’s handling of the issue, observing that the “apprehension of law and order was an imaginary ghost created by state authorities for their convenience to put one community against the other under suspicion.”
The division bench further remarked that the district administration should have treated the issue as an opportunity to promote communal harmony and bridge differences between communities through mediation rather than allowing tensions to escalate.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
