Opposition Lawmakers Submit Impeachment Motion Against Madras High Court Judge Over Temple Lamp Controversy

New Delhi:

More than 120 opposition MPs, including Congress' Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, have submitted a proposal to impeach Madras High Court Justice GR Swaminathan regarding his decisions in the Thirupparankundram Subramaniaswamy temple controversy.

The impeachment proposal was presented to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Tuesday afternoon, highlighting the growing tension between Tamil Nadu's ruling DMK, represented by Kanimozhi, and a member of the state judiciary.

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, facing a challenging Assembly election next year, has received support for its judge removal effort from allies within the Congress-led INDIA opposition bloc.

The Thirupparankundram Subramaniaswamy temple dispute centers on lighting a festival lamp on one of two ancient pillars, known as 'deepathon,' located on a hill in Tamil Nadu's Madurai.

This hill houses both a sixth-century temple and a 14th-century dargah.

Following a controversial hearing on Monday, Justice Swaminathan overruled objections from the state government and temple officials, ordering the lamp to be lit on the pillar positioned halfway up the hill rather than the one at the hill's base, which has been the traditional location for over a century. The judge reasoned that the upper pillar also constitutes temple property and must therefore be included in the ritual. The court emphasized the necessity of asserting possession.

The DMK has maintained that such an order could potentially ignite communal tensions, particularly with Assembly elections less than six months away. They've also noted that Justice Swaminathan's ruling reverses a 2017 judgment issued by a Madras High Court division bench.

The temple did not comply with the court's initial order; on Wednesday, December 3, during the festival, the lamp was lit at the traditional lower pillar location.

Displeased by this non-compliance, the judge then mandated the lamp also be lit on the upper pillar, which led to chaotic scenes as hundreds attempted to climb the hill to light the lamp – supported by armed central security forces – prompting local officials to implement prohibitory orders.

On Thursday, December 4, appeals from the Tamil Nadu government were heard by a two-judge Madras High Court bench. Among various arguments, the state contended that it (and the dargah administration, which also opposed lighting the lamp on the upper pillar) should have been given 30 days to appeal the original Monday order before enforcement.

The state further argued that deploying the Central Industrial Security Force constituted judicial overreach, pointing out that this force is intended to secure court premises, not enforce law. The state also claimed the petitioner mobilized crowds and disrupted public harmony at the temple site.

The petitioners responded by stating that police had refused security despite a court order, and that non-compliance had necessitated a second court order allowing them to light the lamp.

The court ruled against the Tamil Nadu government, and on Friday the state filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which has agreed to hear the case but has not yet scheduled a date.