The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with a Madras High Court order dismissing a plea filed by the Hindu Dharma Parishad seeking permission to light a lamp atop the Thiruparankundram Hills in Tamil Nadu. However, the Court reduced the costs imposed on the petitioner from ₹50,000 to ₹5,000.

A vacation bench of Justices PS Narasimha, Aravind Kumar and Shree Chandrashekhar was hearing a challenge to the High Court's April 9 order. While the bench found no reason to interfere with the High Court's decision, it felt that the costs imposed were too high.

"While we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court, we are of the opinion that the costs of ₹50,000 are excessive and can be reduced to ₹5,000," the Supreme Court said.

The Madras High Court had earlier dismissed the petition and imposed costs of ₹50,000. The division bench of Justices N Sathish Kumar and M Jothiraman had also criticised the filing of such petitions for alleged political gains.

Background

The dispute relates to the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam atop the Thiruparankundram Hill near a dargah.

In December 2025, Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court directed the management of the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple to light the lamp at a stone pillar on the hill. The judge later expressed displeasure over the State Government's alleged failure to implement the order.

When the order was not carried out, contempt proceedings were initiated. During those proceedings, Justice Swaminathan allowed devotees to go to the hill and light the lamp themselves under CISF protection. The Court also set aside prohibitory orders issued under Section 144 CrPC.

The Tamil Nadu Government challenged the contempt order before a division bench, but its appeal was dismissed. Later, the division bench stayed the contempt proceedings pending before the single judge.

The Hindu Dharma Parishad, through its Managing Trustee K.K. Ramesh, claimed that activities taking place on the hill were affecting its religious sanctity and violating provisions of the Ancient Monuments, Archaeological Sites and Remains Act.

The organisation sought directions to the Union Government and the Archaeological Survey of India to take action against officials who allegedly prevented Hindus from lighting the lamp while allowing members of other communities access to the hill.

With the Supreme Court declining to interfere, the Madras High Court's dismissal of the plea remains in force, though the costs payable by the petitioner have now been reduced to ₹5,000.

Case: Hindu Dharma Parishad v. Union of India & Ors. | SLP (C) No. 17085/2026