Would be atrocious if Thiruparankundram temple challenges lamp lighting verdict in SC: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court on Monday quizzed the State on whether it intends to file an appeal before the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's directives to ensure the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp at a Deepathoon atop the sacred Thiruparankundram hillock. .The Court was dealing with a contempt of court case filed against the Madurai District Collector and district police authorities over their alleged defiance of such directives. Justice GR Swaminathan had earlier warned that he would not drop the matter without an apology and proper explanations from the district officers concerned. However, today, the judge said that he would refrain from proceeding further with the contempt case if the State shows that it is willing to now comply with the directives. In this regard, the Court asked whether the Tamil Nadu government has plans to approach the Supreme Court next."If police and (District administration) say they intend to go to Supreme Court, I will adjourn the proceedings by a month. No issue. Please make a statement. I won't take one step further," he said. .The Additional Advocate General (AAG) replied that the State is still exploring all remedies available in the law and that no decision has been taken.Justice Swaminathan called on the State's counsel to give a straight answer, adding that he may even close the contempt proceedings if the State has no plans to approach the Supreme Court in appeal. "If you are not going to file appeal, take it from me, I am closing the contempt. If you say, you are willing to abide, I will close it," he went on to say. "Things are being discussed and contemplated, but a decision is yet to be taken. (At this stage) I can't say whether we are or we are not," the AAG maintained. .Meanwhile, Justice Swaminathan also said that it would be "atrocious" if the administration of the Thiruparankundram Arulmigu Subramania Swamy temple decides to appeal a verdict that is intended to serve the temple's devotees. "There are (four) parties. One is the dargah (located near the Deepathoon site, at the same hillock); the temple; police; and fourth is the administration. All four parties are entitled to go to the Supreme Court, but I would think it is ridiculous if the temple goes to the Supreme Court. That would be my perception, because they can't be said to be aggrieved by this order. Going on appeal (by temple), according to me, would be atrocious. They are there to uphold the rights (of temple devotees), not subvert them. Others can go - their rights are at stake," Justice Swaminathan observed. .The judge eventually decided to hear the matter further on March 2, by when the Madurai District Collector/District Magistrate (DM) KJ Praveen Kumar (IAS) has been given an opportunity to file an additional affidavit explaining his conduct. The contempt proceedings concerning the Collector have been split from the proceedings related to the other authorities, namely the Madurai Commissioner of Police, Deputy Commissioner of Police and an Executive Officer. .Representing the district authorities, Senior Advocate V Giri today maintained that none of these authorities had any malicious intent to flout court orders. They had simply acted to ensure that public order was maintained and communal clashes were prevented, as huge crowds from different factions gathered near the hillock last month, Giri said.Justice Swaminathan, however, expressed reservations about whether the authorities were actually remorseful about not following court directives.He referred to a January 2026 article in Caravan magazine, which reported that Deputy Commissioner of Police Inigo Thivyan, "calmly" commented that he would face whatever consequences came his way.Giri and the State's counsel replied that it was unlikely that an officer of the State made any comment to mean that he is not bothered by the Court's directives."No officer would ever say, 'I will not respect the orders of the court' ...When 1000s gathered...out of anxiety, someone may say something. In a spur of the moment (such comments), may come," a State counsel said.Giri questioned whether an off-handed comment may have been reported out of context, but added that Thivyan must explain his conduct if he did actually make such remarks."Some press may would like the topic to remain hot and remain debated for a few more months. But I don't think any responsible officer would say (this)...Some journalists have a talent to pick what is necessary to keep the fire burning. (To say something like he doesn't care about consequences), I don't think it has been done. But he is there before lordship, let him answer," Giri said..He also urged the Court to give some more time for the Collector to place an additional affidavit on record, if Justice Swaminathan was not yet inclined to drop the contempt proceedings against the IAS officer.The judge allowed the request. Justice Swaminathan also indicated that he has been persuaded by the senior counsel to some extent about taking a lenient view when it came to the contempt case against the remaining three district officers..[Live Coverage].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.