It Questions Three-Way Partition When No Party Had Asked for It
Dhananjay Mahapatra | TNN
New Delhi: The 50-year legal battle for control of the 2.77 acres of Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid will start from scratch, with the Supreme Court on Monday faulting and staying the Allahabad High Court order dividing the templemosque complex among Ram Lalla (the idol of Lord Rama), Hindus and Muslims.
A Bench of Justices Aftab Alam and R M Lodha had heard the petitioners — Sunni Wakf Board, guardian of the idol and Nirmohi Akhara - only briefly when they took strong exception to the HC order to partition the land when no party had asked for it. “The fundamental nature of the decree (partition of land) was not sought by any party. The High Court has gone on a very new path. This is something very surprising,” it said.
It continued, “This is a case where entirely new dimension is given by the High Court. Therefore, the HC judgment must be stayed. Further proceedings will also be stayed relating to drawing up of the decree by the HC.” Justices Alam and Lodha further said, “How can decree for partition be passed as the HC has done? Something very strange has been done by the HC on its own when no party had sought such a relief.”
The Suprem Court Bench stayed the September 30 HC order which, broadly speaking, gave twothirds of the disputed site to Hindu claimants while keeping aside the rest for Muslim groups, leaving the field open for parties to start anew the litigation for control of the land where Babri Masjid stood but which has been claimed by Hindu groups as the site for a Ram temple.
“There will be status quo and operation of the HC order will be stayed. It needs to be corrected at this stage. Such a partition decree could not have been passed. When we stay the operation of the HC judgment, the drawing of the decree gets automatically stayed,” Justices Alam and Lodha said.
This means, parties have to argue afresh as they had done when the litigation started in the 1960s — to claim and establish right over the whole of the 2.77 acres of land. The SC admitted all the petitions which challenged the HC judgment.
The Allahabad HC had on September 30 divided the templemosque complex equally between the idol’s guardian, Sunni Wakf Board and Nirmohi Akhara. It also ordered all to maintain status quo, which permitted puja at the makeshift temple erected after a Hindu mob demolished Babri Masjid on December 6, 1994.
The order evoked mixed reactions. It disappointed the hardliners on both sides, but others saw it as opening a window for resolution of a vexed dispute which altered the political landscape in the 90s, propelling BJP to power and vitiated the Hindu-Muslim equations across vast swathes. It was criticized also on the ground that it was a political judgment but, again, many saw it as an “out-of-box” improvisation which offered a practical way out of the impasse.
The order for status quo will not interfere with puja at the makeshift temple, but the court said there will be no religious activity, either by Hindus or Muslims, on the 67.703 acres of land surrounding the 2.77 acres of disputed land.
Both Hindu and Muslim organizations who have petitioned the SC against the HC verdict agreed to maintain status quo at both the 2.77 acres of disputed land as well as on 67.703 acres of surrounding land — an indication that the SC’s observations may encourage those sticking to maximalist positions in the two camps.
The 67.703 acres of land was acquired by the Centre through Acquisition of Certain Areas at Ayodhya Ordinance on January 7, 1993, which later became an Act.
ALLAHABAD HC’S ORDER ON SEPT 30, 2010
Disputed site of 2.77 acres to be
partitioned equally among 3 parties: Muslims, Hindus and Nirmohi Akhara
Area under central dome of mosque (demolished by kar sevaks) to be allotted to Hindus. Idols to remain where they are. Nirmohi Akhara to be allotted parts of outer courtyard covered earlier by Ram Chabutra, Sita Rasoi & Bhandar Part of outer courtyard in possession of Hindus may be given to Muslims. If this does not make up shortfall in 1/3rd share in disputed site, Muslims may be given portion of adjoining 67.7 acres
BJP hails status quo; Congress cautious
The Supreme Court’s order for status quo was welcomed by all political parties, staying the Allahabad High Court ruling on Ayodhya, though the Congress avoided outright rejection of the HC order. BJP stressed that the puja at the disputed site would continue. CPM leader Brinda Karat had no hesitation in welcoming the SC’s intervention, saying, “We had criticised the Allahabad High Court judgment and using the issue of religious belief as a ground to give its order.” P7 SC takes cognizance of earlier status quo orders
New Delhi: The SC bench has adopted in its interim order the two status quo orders with regard to 2.77 acres and 67.703 acres of land passed by the apex court earlier. The orders were pointed out by senior advocates Ravi Shankar Prasad, P P Rao, Ranjit Kumar, Rakesh Dwivedi and Anoop Chaudhary. The first one was passed in relation to 2.77 acres in October 24, 1993 in the case Ismail Faruqui Vs Union of India. The SC had said, “The best solution in the circumstances, on revival of suits is, therefore, to maintain status quo as on 7-1-1993, when the law came into force modifying the interim orders in the suits to that extent by curtailing the practice of worship by Hindus in the disputed area to the extent it stands reduced under the Act instead of conferring on them the larger right available under the court orders till intervention was made by legislation.”
The second order pertaining to 67.703 acres disputed land came in Mohd Aslam Bhure case on March 13-14, 2002. The March 13-14, 2002 order said, “we direct that on the 67.703 acres of acquired land located in various plots detailed in the Schedule to Acquisition of Central Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993, which is vested in the central government, no religious activity of any kind by anyone either symbolic or actual including bhumipuja or shila puja, shall be permitted or allowed to take place.” “Furthermore, no part of the aforesaid land shall be handed over by the government to anyone and the same shall be retained by the government till the disposal of this writ petition,” the bench said.
No comments:
Post a Comment