Tamil Nadu opposes plea for ASI takeover of Thirupparankundram temple and hill in Supreme Court

The Tamil Nadu government has asked the Supreme Court to reject a petition seeking to hand the Arulmigu Subramaniaswamy temple and Thirupparankundram hill in Madurai to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), arguing that ownership of the site and its religious customs were decided long ago.

The state's position is set out in an affidavit filed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department before a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M Pancholi, details of which were reported on Friday. The matter is listed for hearing on November 17.

What the petitioner wants

The petition, filed by the Hindu Dharma Parishad, makes three requests: that the ASI take over the temple and the hill; that a lamp be kept burning round the clock at the Deepathoon, an old stone pillar near the hilltop; and that the whole hill be lit with lamps during the annual Karthigai Deepam festival so that devotees can worship without hindrance. The pillar stands about 50 metres from the Hazrat Sultan Sikandar Badusha Auliya dargah on the hill. The court had issued notice on the plea to the Centre, the state and the ASI in January.

The state's response

In the affidavit, HR&CE Commissioner T G Vinay said the hill belongs to the temple to the extent recognised by a 1923 civil court decree that the Privy Council restored in 1931, and described that title as settled. He said the festival lamp has been lit for more than 150 years at the Deepa Mandapam near the Uchipillaiyar shrine, in line with temple tradition, and that attempts to light lamps nearer the summit in 1862 and 1912 were resisted as not being established custom.

The department also cited a 1996 Madras High Court order that only the temple administration may light the lamp and that any change of location needs its decision and prior HR&CE approval. It argued that ASI protection covers specific features such as the rock-cut cave and inscriptions, not the whole hill or the working temple, and that the petition under Article 32 is not maintainable because no breach of fundamental rights has been shown. It warned that lighting lamps at several points, especially close to the dargah, could create law and order problems.

Background

The dispute has been in the courts since 2025. A single judge of the Madras High Court allowed the lamp to be lit at the stone pillar as well as at the traditional spot, and a division bench upheld that order in January 2026. The state had refused permission earlier, citing possible law and order concerns.

The Hindu Dharma Parishad's detailed response to the state's affidavit was not available. The Supreme Court's hearing next week is expected to take up the competing claims over the temple's management and festival practices.