Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], January 25 : Madras HC Judge Justice GR Swaminathan, whose judgement to light lamps on the "Deepathoon" in Tirupparankundram temple sparked a controversy in Tamil Nadu, on Saturday, lit a look-alike lamp at the Dhara Divine Awards in Chennai.
While lighting the lamp, he jokingly said, "Is this not a survey stone right which I light right?"
Speaking about the event, he said, "I am so happy to participate in the programme. Everyone who got a prize today is great and excellent in their respective work. Particularly, Ilaiyaraaja's grandson, who is so humble and fell at our feet and got blessings."
He further jokingly said, "I have four and a half years' service and believe and hope I will not be suspended before my tenure."
"Today's programme gave me hope to strengthen Sanathana Dharma," he added.
Justice GR Swaminathan faced strong criticism from the ruling DMK government over his judgment to light the lamps on the "Deepathoon" in Tirupparankundram temple.
Over 100 INDIA bloc MPs from the Lok Sabha during the Winter session submitted a letter to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla regarding an impeachment motion against Madras HC judge Justice Swaminathan
However, the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court on January 6 upheld Justice GR Swaminathan's order.
The bench, consisting of Justices G Jayachandran and KK Ramakrishnan, observed that the district administration ought to have treated the issue as an opportunity to bridge the gap between the communities through mediation.
It further held that, since the hill is a protected site, any activity there must strictly comply with the Act's provisions. The Court clarified that the lamp may be lit and the number of persons permitted can be fixed, subject to consultation with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
Petitioner Rajesh called the court's order remarkable, stating that the lamp should be lit on a Deepathoon and the temple administration should make the necessary arrangements for it. He said that the arguments presented by the state government into the matter were rejected by the court.