No materials shown to prove pillar is not a deepathoon

Senior counsel appearing for the original petitioners in the Thirupparankundram case told the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday that the State was claiming that the stone pillar on the hill was not a deepathoon only to complicate the matter. The appellants had not shown any materials to prove that it was not a deepathoon, they argued.

A Division Bench of Justices G. Jayachandran and K.K. Ramakrishnan continued to hear the appeals preferred against the order of Justice G.R. Swaminathan, who had directed the Subramaniya Swamy temple management to light the Karthigai Deepam at the deepathoon besides the usual spots, as well as other related appeals.

Representing one of the petitioners, senior advocate S. Sriram told the court that several claims were being made about the pillar, including one that it is a Jain structure, and the Waqf Board’s claim over the area where it is located.

The temple and the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department said there was no proof to establish that the stone pillar was a deepathoon. Such claims were being made only to complicate the issue, he said.

The senior counsel contended that their rights were not safe in the hands of the authorities. “The State should be secular and neutral to protect the rights. However, the State was tilted to one side. It was not a case of a new custom being created,” he claimed, adding that the lighting of the deepam was an essential practice of Hindus.

The State had taken the stand that the deepam was being lit only at the Uchipillaiyar temple mandapam for the purpose of this case. As per the 1996 Madras High Court judgment, it recognises that the authorities can consider lighting the deepam at any other place besides where it was being lit. However, the authorities have not acted, he said.

The senior counsel submitted there was no violation of the principles of natural justice in the Single Bench order.

Senior advocate P. Valliappan, appearing for another petitioner, reiterated that the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam was an essential practice of the Hindus. The appellants have not produced any materials to show that the stone pillar on Thirupparankundram hill is not a deepathoon.

Referring to the judgment in the 1920 Original Suit demarcating the portions belonging to the temple and the dargah and the Privy Council judgment, he said the Mohammedans cannot claim that the entire hilltop was theirs.

The court will continue to hear the appeals on Thursday.