RAM MANDIR WITHIN SITE
SC Settles, By Unanimous Verdict, Centuries-Old Hindu-Muslim Conflict By Granting Entire 2.77-Acre Disputed Land To Deity Ram Lalla, One Of The 3 Claimants In The Case; Directs Centre To Appoint Trust In 3 Months To Manage Construction Of Temple
Balancing Act: 5 Acres At ‘Prominent Place’ For Masjid In Ayodhya
Dhananjay Mahapatra & Amit Anand Choudhary TNN
New Delhi:10.11.2019
A five-judge Supreme Court bench on Saturday settled the centuries-old Hindu-Muslim dispute that had been in courts for 70 years through a unanimous verdict and handed over the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid disputed land for construction of a Ram temple. It also allocated five acres at a “prominent place” in Ayodhya for a mosque.
The bench said the verdict weighed in favour of deity Ram Lalla because the Hindu parties could produce better evidence to substantiate their right over the disputed land. However, the bench was also unanimous that the Muslim parties too had established a competitive right over a part of the land. Hence, it used its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to direct the Centre/UP government to allot five acres at a prominent place in Ayodhya for construction of a mosque. The bench ordered framing of a scheme and its implementation through a trust, to be set up by the Centre, within three months for construction of the temple
and its management.
The bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi, CJI-designate Sharad Arvind Bobde and Justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer took just 23 days to author a common judgment running into 929 pages.
Sunni & Shia boards won’t file review pleas
UP Sunni Waqf Board and Shia Central Waqf Board, parties to the case, welcomed the SC verdict and said they would not file review petitions. Iqbal Ansari, another litigant, lauded the order. However, AIMPLB’s Kamal Farooqui and AIMIM chief Owaisi said they were “disappointed”. P10
CJI Ranjan Gogoi reads out 26-page summary of Ayodhya judgment
Top Court Turns Down Nirmohi Akhara’s Suit
The bench had reserved its verdict on October 16 and delivered it on November 9. CJI Gogoi read out a 26-page summary of the judgment for close to 40 minutes in a packed courtroom. “Jai Shriram” chants from advocates in black robes echoed immediately after the pronouncement of judgment, inserting a discordant note to the otherwise smooth process.
The judgment was along anticipated lines. After parsing the hearings, legal eagles were expecting the bench to turn in a verdict favouring the construction of Ram Mandir at the disputed site. But the 5-0 score came as a surprise.
The SC set aside the September 30, 2010, verdict of the Allahabad high court, which had divided the core disputed area of 1,487 square yards, included the disputed 2.77 acres of plot, into three equal parts and allotted one part each to Ram Lalla (the area under the central dome of the demolished mosque), Nirmohi Akhara (outer courtyard including Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi) and the rest to Sunni Waqf Board.
Nirmohi Akhara became the biggest loser on the day as the SC dismissed its 1959 suit staking claim to the site as time barred and refused to even recognise its right as a ‘shebait’ (priest), thus robbing it of any major role in the to-be-constructed temple. The apex court ordered that it would get “appropriate representation” on the trust, but that would be like a participation certificate, with the court leaving it to the Centre to determine what would constitute “appropriate representation”.
The directive that construction of the temple be assigned to a trust to be set up by the Centre comes at the cost of Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, which was set up by the VHP in 1985 to construct and manage the proposed Ram temple. However, the Sangh Parivar constituent, which spearheaded the temple movement, should still get to play a key role in the matter, considering that the court has given the Centre a decisive say in determining the composition of the proposed trust.
The verdict was celebrated by temple votaries. Those arrayed on the opposite side were, obviously, not satisfied, but there were signs suggesting an acquiescence, if grudging, into the outcome: something that raised the prospect of an awkward closure of the vexed mandir versus mosque question that has left an indelible imprint on politics and society.
Political parties also restrained their impulse. BJP and Sangh Parivar, starting from PM Narendra Modi, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat and BJP chief Amit Shah, exercised restraint. Political parties and other outfits, who had opposed the mandir campaign, also calibrated their reaction to suit the need for peace.
In its order, the court said, “The central government shall, within three months, formulate a scheme pursuant under Sections 6 and 7 of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993. The scheme shall envisage setting up of a trust with a board of trustees or any other appropriate body under Section 6. The scheme shall make necessary provisions in regard to the functioning of the trust or body, including on matters relating to the management of the trust, the powers of the trustees, including the construction of a temple and all necessary, incidental and supplemental matters.”
The SC told the governments at the Centre and the state that handing over of the disputed site to the trust must coincide with the handing over of five acres of land at a prominent place in Ayodhya to the Sunni Waqf Board for construction of a mosque. “The Sunni Waqf Board would be at liberty, on the allotment of the land, to take necessary steps for the construction of a mosque on the land so allotted together with other associated facilities,” the bench said, adding that till the scheme and allotment of alternative five acres to the Waqf Board was worked out, possession of the disputed land would continue to remain with the Centre.
ON GUARD: A security officer standing guard at Sri Krishna Janmasthan temple in Mathura
SC Settles, By Unanimous Verdict, Centuries-Old Hindu-Muslim Conflict By Granting Entire 2.77-Acre Disputed Land To Deity Ram Lalla, One Of The 3 Claimants In The Case; Directs Centre To Appoint Trust In 3 Months To Manage Construction Of Temple
Balancing Act: 5 Acres At ‘Prominent Place’ For Masjid In Ayodhya
Dhananjay Mahapatra & Amit Anand Choudhary TNN
New Delhi:10.11.2019
A five-judge Supreme Court bench on Saturday settled the centuries-old Hindu-Muslim dispute that had been in courts for 70 years through a unanimous verdict and handed over the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid disputed land for construction of a Ram temple. It also allocated five acres at a “prominent place” in Ayodhya for a mosque.
The bench said the verdict weighed in favour of deity Ram Lalla because the Hindu parties could produce better evidence to substantiate their right over the disputed land. However, the bench was also unanimous that the Muslim parties too had established a competitive right over a part of the land. Hence, it used its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to direct the Centre/UP government to allot five acres at a prominent place in Ayodhya for construction of a mosque. The bench ordered framing of a scheme and its implementation through a trust, to be set up by the Centre, within three months for construction of the temple
and its management.
The bench of CJI Ranjan Gogoi, CJI-designate Sharad Arvind Bobde and Justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer took just 23 days to author a common judgment running into 929 pages.
Sunni & Shia boards won’t file review pleas
UP Sunni Waqf Board and Shia Central Waqf Board, parties to the case, welcomed the SC verdict and said they would not file review petitions. Iqbal Ansari, another litigant, lauded the order. However, AIMPLB’s Kamal Farooqui and AIMIM chief Owaisi said they were “disappointed”. P10
CJI Ranjan Gogoi reads out 26-page summary of Ayodhya judgment
Top Court Turns Down Nirmohi Akhara’s Suit
The bench had reserved its verdict on October 16 and delivered it on November 9. CJI Gogoi read out a 26-page summary of the judgment for close to 40 minutes in a packed courtroom. “Jai Shriram” chants from advocates in black robes echoed immediately after the pronouncement of judgment, inserting a discordant note to the otherwise smooth process.
The judgment was along anticipated lines. After parsing the hearings, legal eagles were expecting the bench to turn in a verdict favouring the construction of Ram Mandir at the disputed site. But the 5-0 score came as a surprise.
The SC set aside the September 30, 2010, verdict of the Allahabad high court, which had divided the core disputed area of 1,487 square yards, included the disputed 2.77 acres of plot, into three equal parts and allotted one part each to Ram Lalla (the area under the central dome of the demolished mosque), Nirmohi Akhara (outer courtyard including Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi) and the rest to Sunni Waqf Board.
Nirmohi Akhara became the biggest loser on the day as the SC dismissed its 1959 suit staking claim to the site as time barred and refused to even recognise its right as a ‘shebait’ (priest), thus robbing it of any major role in the to-be-constructed temple. The apex court ordered that it would get “appropriate representation” on the trust, but that would be like a participation certificate, with the court leaving it to the Centre to determine what would constitute “appropriate representation”.
The directive that construction of the temple be assigned to a trust to be set up by the Centre comes at the cost of Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, which was set up by the VHP in 1985 to construct and manage the proposed Ram temple. However, the Sangh Parivar constituent, which spearheaded the temple movement, should still get to play a key role in the matter, considering that the court has given the Centre a decisive say in determining the composition of the proposed trust.
The verdict was celebrated by temple votaries. Those arrayed on the opposite side were, obviously, not satisfied, but there were signs suggesting an acquiescence, if grudging, into the outcome: something that raised the prospect of an awkward closure of the vexed mandir versus mosque question that has left an indelible imprint on politics and society.
Political parties also restrained their impulse. BJP and Sangh Parivar, starting from PM Narendra Modi, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat and BJP chief Amit Shah, exercised restraint. Political parties and other outfits, who had opposed the mandir campaign, also calibrated their reaction to suit the need for peace.
In its order, the court said, “The central government shall, within three months, formulate a scheme pursuant under Sections 6 and 7 of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993. The scheme shall envisage setting up of a trust with a board of trustees or any other appropriate body under Section 6. The scheme shall make necessary provisions in regard to the functioning of the trust or body, including on matters relating to the management of the trust, the powers of the trustees, including the construction of a temple and all necessary, incidental and supplemental matters.”
The SC told the governments at the Centre and the state that handing over of the disputed site to the trust must coincide with the handing over of five acres of land at a prominent place in Ayodhya to the Sunni Waqf Board for construction of a mosque. “The Sunni Waqf Board would be at liberty, on the allotment of the land, to take necessary steps for the construction of a mosque on the land so allotted together with other associated facilities,” the bench said, adding that till the scheme and allotment of alternative five acres to the Waqf Board was worked out, possession of the disputed land would continue to remain with the Centre.
ON GUARD: A security officer standing guard at Sri Krishna Janmasthan temple in Mathura
No comments:
Post a Comment