|
The controversy over the lighting of Karthigai Deepam at the stone Deepathoon at Thiruparankundram continues to snowball. Sikkandar Dargah Secretary Arif Khan, has now claimed that there is no evidence which suggests that lamps have traditionally been lit at the hill.
He further asserted that lamps have been lit only at the Uchi Pillaiyar Temple, and added that in earlier court orders, the structure was not described as a deepathoon (lamp pillar). , "... They are asking why the lamp should not be lit in the areas belonging to the temple on Thiruparankundram Hill, and why it should be lit specifically at the dargah site... There is no evidence to show that lamps have traditionally been lit at that place. Traditionally, the lamp has been lit only at the Uchi Pillaiyar Temple... In the earlier court orders, it was not described as a deepathoon (lamp pillar)..." Khan told ANI. Earlier, the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board informed the Madras High Court that the stone pillar located at the summit of a hill in Madurai district belongs to the Sikandar Badusha Dargah. This submission was made during the hearing of a batch of appeals challenging a single judge's order, which had directed the Subramaniya Swamy Temple administration to light the Karthigai Deepam at the stone Deepathoon (lamp post) located on one of the peaks of the Thiruparankundram hills, in addition to the customary locations. Referring to a judicial order passed in a civil suit in 1920, counsel for the Waqf Board submitted before a Division Bench comprising Justices G. Jayachandran and K. K. Ramakrishnan that there were categorical findings that the flight of steps leading from Nellithope to the hilltop belonged to the dargah. It was also stated that there is a finding that the hilltop and the surrounding areas, including the location where the stone pillar and a mandapam are situated, belong to Muslims. The counsel further submitted that the stone pillar can be accessed through the dargah. He added that the issue relating to the right of pathway can be decided only by a civil court. Appearing on behalf of the Madurai District Collector and the Commissioner of Police, the counsel submitted that in the earlier orders passed by the High Court in 1996 and 2014, there was no reference to the Deepathoon (stone pillar for lighting lamps), and that there is no evidence to show that the pillar is a Deepathoon. He also noted that the petition submitted by the petitioner to the temple authorities made no mention of a Deepathoon. (ANI)
|
