By allowing Muslims to offer Namaz at the Nellithoppu area atop the Thiruparankundram Subramaniya Swamy temple has kicked off outrage among Hindus.
On 21st March, Muslims were allowed to offer Namaz at the Nellithoppu area of the Sikkandar Badhusha Avuliya Dargah atop the Thiruparankundram hills in Madurai, Tamil Nadu, but with restrictions. Muslims were against being asked for IDs like Aadhar or others, which interfered with their religious practices.
அரசு ஆவணப்படி சிக்கந்தர் கல்லறை கோரிப்பாளையத்தில் உள்ளது .
ரம்ஜான் தொழுகை என்று பிரச்சனை செய்ய வேண்டும் என்று இங்கு வருகின்றனர்.
இதற்குக் காரணம் ராமநாதபுரம் பாராளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் நவாஸ் கனி இந்த இடம் வக்பு வாரியத்துக்கு சொந்தம் என்று கூறியவன் இதனால் தான் பிரச்சனையே ஆரம்பம். pic.twitter.com/kM2YIHpElX
— Krishnaraj (@Krishna73674119) March 21, 2026
Hindu Munnani says Muslims, with the active support of DMK and its allies, are creating trouble in the peaceful hill. When a case related to prayer is pending in a court, how could they claim the right to offer Namaz? “They want to rake up a new issue for political gains and to foment communal clashes. We urge the government and courts to stop allowing them till the verdict is out on the issue.”
வேண்டும் என்றே திருப்பரங்குன்றத்தில் பதட்டத்தை உருவாக்கும் இ**லாமியர்கள்!
இன்று ரம்ஜானை முன்னிட்டு திருப்பரங்குன்றம் மலை மேல் உள்ள தர்காவில் சிறப்பு தொழுகை செய்வதாக நூறுக்கும் மேற்பட்ட மு**லிம்கள் திருப்பரங்குன்றம் மலை மீது சென்றனர்.
திருப்பரங்குன்றம் வழக்கு நீதிமன்றத்தில்… pic.twitter.com/U36QsAehjO
— Hindu Munnani (@hindumunnani_tn) March 21, 2026
Muslims defended their going atop the hill to offer Namaz, citing the February 9, 2026 Supreme Court ruling that prayers are permitted strictly on Ramzan and Bakrid festival days only, upholding a Madras High Court judgment designed to maintain law and order and avoid interfering with Hindu worship on the hill.
Challenging the High Court’s verdict, M. Imam Hussain, a worshipper at the Dargah, moved the Supreme Court. A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale, which heard the matter, refused to interfere with the High Court’s order, terming it balanced. Counsel for the petitioner, Prashant Bhushan, stated that there has never been a law and order problem in the area, saying “…Ramzan and Bakri-eid festival days alone. That is what we are aggrieved by, the word ‘alone’… once the Nellithoppu area has been decreed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the Privy Council, the High Court also records that affirmation. They say Mohamaddens have been granted declaration of the title for the extent of 33 cents in the Nellithoppu area… now, the problem is, despite holding that the Nellithoppu area belongs to Mohammads, they have restricted prayers to Ramzan and Bakri-eid. Other conditions can be there; we maintain law and order, but there has never been a law and order problem.”
Justice Kumar said that had there been no law and order issue, there would not have been a meeting of the Peace Committee. The bench said, “It seems to be a very, very balanced order,” adding, “We do not propose to interfere with the order. Without expressing any opinion on the rights of the parties, the impugned order stands upheld.”
The performance of Namaz and animal sacrifice at the hill, which also houses the Subramaniaswamy temple, has been a matter of controversy.
In June 2025, a two-judge bench of the High Court delivered a split verdict. While Justice Nisha Banu refused to interfere with the practice of animal sacrifice, Justice S. Srimathy took a different view and said that the Dargah should approach the civil court to establish its right to practise the Kandoori animal sacrifice and prayers during Ramzan, Bakrid, and other Islamic festivals.
While Justice Banu upheld the rights of Muslim devotees, Justice Srimathy observed that the practice of offering Namaz at Nellithoppu is of recent origin. She also said that the congregation of a large number of persons for such prayers would obstruct the pathway leading to the Kasi Viswanathar temple and therefore encroach upon other portions of the Subramaniya Swamy temple.
Following a split verdict, the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court sent the matter to another judge for final adjudication.
Accordingly, Justice R. Vijayakumar, who was appointed as a third judge after a two-judge Bench delivered a split verdict in June 2025, on October 10, 2025, held that Muslim devotees have limited rights to offer Namaz only on Ramzan and Bakri-Eid.
However, no animal sacrifice, cooking, carrying, or serving of non-vegetarian food was permitted until a competent Civil Court decides with regard to the customary practice of animal sacrifice at the hillock.
Justice Vijayakumar concurred with Justice Srimathy’s opinion that the hill should continue to be called “Thiruparankundram hill” and not “Sikkandar Malai” or “Samanar Kundru,” citing a 1920 civil court decree and historical revenue records.
The High Court, in its judgment delivered in October 2025, had also ruled that animal sacrifice cannot be permitted in the area.
There have been concerted efforts to encroach the entire hill and call it Sikkandar Hill by a section of Muslims and fundamentalist outfits. Hindu Munnani and other organisations, Rama Ravikumar and others, have been consistently resisting all their attempts in this regard.
When Muslims tried to process to the Dargah to offer prayers and slaughter animals, these forums organised counter-protests.
An IUML MP ate biryani at the sacred hill and claimed it was Waqf Board property.
The government did not allow Hindus to protest, but with court orders they held a massive protest in Madurai in February last year and organised a Murugan conference which had the footfall of over 7 lakh Hindus.
Despite this, the government did not allow Hindus to light deepam atop the ancient stone pillar as directed by single judge G. R. Swaminathan.
The DMK government, district magistrate, and police officials prevented Hindus from doing the same. The DMK government challenged the same in the High Court and Supreme Court but lost.
Meanwhile, when contempt proceedings were initiated against them by the High Court (single bench), he suggested permitting a symbolic prayer for 15 minutes for a group of people suggested by it.
Seeking time to ponder it over, the officials, including the EO, challenged it before a division bench and obtained an interim stay.
Aggrieved by their move, single judge Swaminathan said, “Taking advantage of this window period of two weeks, LPAs have been filed. It is the right of the respondents to avail the judicial remedies open to them in law. But I cannot help feeling that I have been taken for a ride. If adjournment is sought to come back to the Court with a response and the request is accepted by the Court, fairness requires that the course of action undertaken is adopted. But probably all is fair not only in love and war but also in litigation.”
Rama Ravikumar, one of the litigants, and his counsel Arun Swaminathan speaking to Organiser weekly said, “What we are worried about is the government or the temple management not allowing Hindus to light a lamp or offer symbolic prayers after High Court and Supreme Court orders. But the same DMK government allowed Muslims to offer Namaz atop the hill citing court orders. Right from the beginning, the DMK government has been taking a one-sided approach, keeping the minority vote bank in mind, leaving Hindus in the lurch who do have a vote of their own to dictate terms during polls.”
Arun Swaminathan pointed out that temple authorities failed to establish their rights though they have documents. Mere possession of documents would not help; one should be in possession of the same. It was missing in this issue. “They own only a small area but are slowly encroaching more areas belonging to the temple.”
As per government records, the Dargah is only in Goripalayam area in Madurai city and not atop the hill. It is learnt that the area of offering Namaz atop the hill has been slowly expanding year after year, with more and more Muslims being brought to this place. It is a worrying factor.
Vishnukanth S., Advocate, Thirupparankundram, told Organiser, “The events that unfolded March 21 at Thirupparankundram Hill are not merely administrative decisions—they are a reflection of a deeper and more disturbing pattern in governance. A pattern that raises a serious constitutional question: Is the State truly secular, or selectively secular?”
He said, “On the occasion of Ramzan, nearly 100 individuals were permitted to offer Namaz at the hilltop. The State machinery acted with remarkable speed and sensitivity, citing compliance with court directions and the need to maintain communal harmony. Law enforcement ensured protection, facilitation, and peaceful conduct. But when it comes to Hindu devotees, the same State adopts an entirely different face.”
Accusing the DMK government of partiality, Vishnukanth said, “For centuries, Bhagwan Subramaniya devotees have regarded this hill as sacred. The lighting of Karthigai Deepam is not a political demonstration—it is a time-honoured religious practice rooted in devotion and tradition.
“Yet, when devotees sought to perform this very practice, they were denied permission, dispersed by police, arrested, and in several cases, even incarcerated. This is not administration. This is discrimination masked as governance. When one group gathers, it is termed religious harmony. When another asserts its faith, it is labelled a law and order threat. The contradiction is glaring. The inconsistency is indefensible,” he added.
Warning of the lurking danger ahead, Vishnukanth said, “What is being witnessed today is a dangerous shift—from secular governance to vote-bank-driven appeasement. Let it be stated unequivocally: this is not about opposing any one religious community. This is about opposing unequal treatment by the State.”
He said, “When Hindu devotees are repeatedly denied their traditional rights at the very same location where others are accommodated, the message being sent is deeply damaging—that the majority faith can be regulated, restricted, and even suppressed without consequence. Such a perception, whether intentional or engineered, erodes public trust and strikes at the very root of constitutional morality.”
He sought answers from the government clearly and without ambiguity: “Why is there one standard for one community and another for the rest? Why are traditional Hindu practices repeatedly curtailed at Thirupparankundram Hill? Why are devotees treated as offenders for expressing their faith? If harmony is the goal, it must be uniform, consistent, and impartial. Anything less is not governance—it is institutional bias. And when bias enters administration, democracy itself stands weakened.”
Vedic Science Research Centre head Bala Gauthaman said in a video on this topic, “DMK government is slowly allowing Muslims to take over the entire hill as theirs, right under the nose of Hindus who are divided or in a passive state of mind. Crying after losing will not help anything; preventing it is better. The DMK government is playing the appeasement politics card very subtly.”
