The Supreme Court has attracted controversy for delay in hearing the case. (Photo: PTI)
HIGHLIGHTS
- In October last year, the Supreme Court said no to an urgent hearing and said the matter would be taken up in 2019
- On January 4, the Supreme Court heard the Ayodhya case for 60 seconds and adjourned the matter to January 10
- The January 10 hearing was adjourned after Justice UU Lalit recused himself from hearing the case
The Supreme Court will hear the politically crucial Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, on Tuesday.
The matter will be heard by a five-judge Constitution bench, comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer.
The apex court, on January 27, had cancelled the scheduled hearing for January 29 as Justice Bobde was not available.
The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title case deals with a controversial piece of land in Uttar Padesh's Ayodhya where Lord Ram is believed to have been born. The Babri Masjid stood on that land until it was controversially demolished by Hindu 'kar-sevaks' in 1992. The Babri demolition led to nation-wide communal riots back then.
Along with the main matters, the constitution bench will also hear the connected issues raised in separate petitions.
As many as 14 appeals have been filed in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among the three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
The Supreme Court has attracted controversy for delay in hearing the case. In October last year, the Supreme Court said no to an urgent hearing and said the matter would be taken up in 2019. On January 4, the Supreme Court heard the Ayodhya case for 60 seconds and adjourned the matter to January 10.
On January 10, a bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, NV Ramana, UU Lalit and DY Chandrachud, was to hear the case. However, the hearing was adjourned after Justice UU Lalit recused himself from hearing the case due a possible conflict of interest.
THE VARIOUS PLEAS
The central government had, on January 29, moved the apex court seeking its nod to return the 67-acre undisputed acquired land around the disputed site to original owners.
The Centre's plea has said that the RJN (a trust to promote construction of Ram Temple) also sought return of excess land acquired to original owners.
The Centre claimed that only 0.313 acre of land was disputed on which the structure stood before it was demolished by 'kar sevaks' on December 6, 1992.
A week after, another petition was filed challenging the constitutional validity of a 1993 central law by which the government acquired 67.703 acres of land, including the disputed premises of Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid.
The plea challenged the legislative competence of the Parliament to acquire religious land.
The petition, filed by seven individuals, including two Lucknow-based lawyers claiming to be devotees of Ram Lalla, has contended that Parliament had no legislative competence to acquire land belonging to the state. Moreover, it said, the state legislature has the exclusive power to make provisions relating to the management of affairs of religious institutions inside its territory.
The petitioners, including lawyers Shishir Chaturvedi and Sanjay Mishra, had submitted that the Acquisition of Certain Areas of Ayodhya Act, 1993 infringes upon the right to religion of Hindus guaranteed and protected under Article 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) of the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment