The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on March 4 granted time to the board of trustees of the Subramania Swamy Temple in Thiruparankundram to consider its suggestion and posted the matter to March 18.
On March 4, the board of trustees of the temple told the court that the judge’s suggestion that respect could be shown to its order allowing 5 persons, selected by the court, for 15 minutes of symbolic prayers at the lower peak (not lighting a lamp) needs to be deliberated upon and consulted with HR and CE department authorities.
After hearing the same, the court posted the matter to March 18 related to the contempt petitions on the Karthigai Deepam thoon row.
The judge said, “I suggest that respect to the order passed by this Court can be shown by permitting a group of exactly 5 persons to be named by this Court to go to the lower peak of the hillock where Deepathoon lies so that symbolic prayers can be offered. I further indicate that this entire exercise can be confined to 15 minutes. This is only a suggestion and not a direction.”
Earlier, on March 2, single judge G.R. Swaminathan, while hearing contempt of court proceedings against the District Collector (DM), Commissioner of Police (CoP), Dy. CoP, and temple EO for their wilful disobedience in honouring the court order, noted the matter. On that day, the District Magistrate (DM) filed an additional affidavit as directed by the judge.
The judge said, “There is a saying that the proof of the pudding lies in the eating. The fact remains that on account of the prohibitory order passed by the District Collector, Madurai, the order passed by this Court was frustrated. The police took shelter only behind the order passed by the District Collector and, in fact, they made it clear that they were only enforcing the order passed by the District Collector while resisting the implementation of the order passed by this Court.” The matter was posted for March 4 after the government side sought time to discuss it with authorities.
Meanwhile, on March 2, the TN Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, on his birthday, in a video defended his government’s stand on the Thiruparankundram controversy, stating that he decided to safeguard the traditions of the temple not as a religious leader, but as the Chief Minister.
He said, “I firmly believe personal faith should not bow down to politics. Rationality need not be at loggerheads with faith; both are faces of the same society. The friendship between Periyar and Adigalar is proof of that. My politics is to unite everyone. We live in the same land although our beliefs vary, we speak the same language and walk towards the same future, this is the pulse of the Dravidian movement.”
If viewed in that background, the DMK ground is unlikely to accept the court suggestion as it fears it would establish the rights of Hindus and become a practice of lighting a lamp on Karthigai Deepam day on the stone pillar. As rightly pointed out by the critics, the DMK government is more concerned about its minority Muslim vote bank than the rights of ‘incoherent’ Hindus.
