The Supreme Court of India on Friday, December 5, 2025, firmly declined to entertain an urgent hearing request from the Tamil Nadu state government. The state had sought to challenge a Madras High Court order permitting the lighting of a lamp at a contentious site in Madurai during the Karthigai festival.
Supreme Court Shuts Down State's Urgent Plea
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heading a two-judge bench, responded with a terse "No mentioning, thank you" to the counsel representing the Tamil Nadu authorities. The state had attempted to 'mention' a Special Leave Petition (SLP) – a procedure for seeking an urgent hearing – against the High Court's directive. This attempt was vigorously opposed by the counsel for the worshippers, who accused the state of "only playing a drama" to influence parallel proceedings in the High Court.
The legal battle centres on the 'Deepathoon' site located on Thirupparankundram Hill, home to the Arulmigu Subramanya Swamy Temple. The dispute ignited when a single judge bench of the Madras High Court, Justice G R Swaminathan, on December 1, allowed a petition by an individual named Rama Ravikumar to light a lamp at the site for the Karthigai festival on December 3.
Contempt Proceedings and Judicial Rebuke
Despite the court order, the district administration, led by Madurai District Collector K J Praveenkumar, refused permission and even imposed prohibitory orders in the area. This led Justice Swaminathan to initiate contempt proceedings on December 3 against Collector Praveenkumar, Madurai City Police Commissioner J Lokanathan, and Temple Executive Officer Yagna Narayanan.
The judge was unequivocal in his criticism, stating, "Contempt has been committed beyond dispute. The order of this court has been breached." He emphasized that his order remained binding unless stayed by a higher bench and ordered that the petitioner be allowed to proceed with the ritual under CISF security, as the state police had refused to provide protection.
Division Bench Upholds Order, Cites 'Ulterior Motive'
The state then appealed to a division bench of the Madras High Court comprising Justices G Jayachandran and K K Ramakrishnan. On Thursday, December 4, the bench not only dismissed the appeal but also delivered a stinging remark. It observed that the appeal was "filed with ulterior motive to preempt contempt action." The bench justified the single judge's order for CISF cover, noting it was necessary due to the state police's non-compliance.
Following this dismissal, Justice Swaminathan again directed compliance for the lamp lighting on Thursday itself and quashed the prohibitory orders. The SLP mentioned before the Supreme Court was filed subsequently by the district collector, who is facing active contempt proceedings. The counsel for the worshippers argued that the state's move in the Supreme Court was a tactical attempt to seek a deferment of the contempt hearing scheduled in the Madurai bench of the High Court on the same Friday morning.
The Supreme Court's refusal to intervene marks a significant moment in the ongoing tussle, upholding the authority of the High Court's orders and leaving the state administration to face the judicial consequences for its alleged defiance.
