The plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government — seeking to challenge the Madras High Court order on permitting the lighting of lamps atop the Thiruparankundram hills — was today raised for urgent hearing before Surya Kant, the Chief Justice of India (CJI), at the Supreme Court of India.

However, another lawyer present objected to the oral request, calling it a “mere drama” — a tactic by the State to claim later that the case had already been mentioned in the highest court. In response, the State’s counsel clarified that the request was simply for “listing” and nothing more. The CJI, though, refused to entertain the oral mention, curtly saying, “No mentioning, thank you.”

Last week, the Supreme Court had issued a circular halting oral mentions for listing, except in rare emergencies and only if permitted by the CJI.

The government’s plea — filed via a Special Leave Petition — seeks to overturn the Madurai Bench’s division-bench ruling that allowed devotees of the Arulmighu Subramaniya Swamy Temple to light the traditional “Karthigai Deepam” lamp on the stone lamp pillar (Deepathoon) atop Thiruparankundram hills, which lie close to a dargah. The division bench had rejected the State’s appeal against a single-judge’s order dated December 3, which had first permitted the lamp lighting under security by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF).

After the contempt appeal was dismissed, the single judge resumed proceedings on December 4, directing local administration and police to allow the lamp lighting the same day and quashing the earlier prohibitory orders. The case was scheduled for compliance reporting at 10:30 AM the next day.

In the interim, the government filed the petition before the Supreme Court — the petition was registered around 8:20 PM — seeking the Court’s review. According to local sources, the authorities prevented the lamp lighting yesterday and detained several leaders who attempted to ascend the hill.

The petitioners are K.J. Praveen Kumar (IAS, District Collector, Madurai) and J. Loganathan (IPS, Thallakulam Police Commissioner), who were the respondents in the contempt proceedings before the single judge.

Case Reference: K.J. Praveen Kumar v. Rama Ravikumar | Diary No. 70144/2025