Short Description
The Supreme Court of India has issued a notice regarding a plea for the Archaeological Survey of India to take control of the Thirupparankundram Lord Murugan Temple, focusing on a request to light a significant stone pillar daily.
Read Time
2 Minutes 30 Seconds
Main Article
In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has responded to a public interest litigation (PIL) regarding the Thirupparankundram Lord Murugan Subramaniya Swamy Temple. Filed by the Madurai-based Hindu Dharma Parishad, the plea seeks the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to assume control of the temple complex and ensure the lighting of the Deepathoon, a prominent stone pillar, continuously for 24 hours a day. This issue has garnered attention for its implications on religious practices and cultural heritage in the region.
The bench, comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi, raised inquiries about whether the matter was still pending in the Madras High Court. It came to light that the High Court had previously upheld an order permitting the lighting of the lamp on the hill, yet the state government’s rhetoric against it has raised eyebrows. The High Court criticized the ruling party, the DMK government, labeling its claims—that illuminating the lamp could disturb public peace—as “ridiculous.” This has led to growing tensions regarding the expression of faith and the government’s role in religious affairs.
Key aspects of the PIL focus on the annual celebration of Karthigai, during which it is customary to illuminate the entire hill with lamps. The petitioner argues that the local government has not treated the wishes of Murugan devotees seriously and is allegedly engaging in actions that could incite religious unrest. This situation underscores the broader discourse regarding religious freedom, government intervention in faith practices, and cultural preservation.
Recent developments, including potential Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) against the High Court’s ruling, indicate that the matter is far from settled. Advocates for the temple’s management emphasize the need for a more respectful approach towards religious sentiments, thereby encouraging the ASI’s intervention as a means to preserve and promote the temple’s historical significance.
Short Summary
The Supreme Court’s recent notice on the plea for ASI to take over the Thirupparankundram Temple highlights the intersections of faith, governance, and cultural preservation. The case raises essential questions about religious freedoms and the state’s responsibilities towards sacred traditions. The outcome could have significant ramifications for the temple’s future and the rights of its devotees.
