The Supreme Court has adjourned till January the hearing of a clutch of pleas challenging the Allahabad High Court's 2010 judgment that ruled that the disputed land on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya be divided into three parts. In one of the first reactions from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Uttar Pradesh deputy chief minister Keshav Prasad Maurya said, "I don't want to comment since it's the decision of Supreme Court. However, the adjournment of the hearing doesn't send a good message."
Meanwhile, Union minister Giriraj Singh remarked that "Hindus are running out of patience on the Ram temple issue." "The Congress has decided to make it a Hindu-Muslim issue. Shri Ram is the cornerstone of faith of the Hindus. Hindus are running out of patience. I fear what will happen if Hindus lose out of patience...," he said.
Whereas, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, mentioning that the BJP does not link the Ram temple with elections, said that the court had given its order earlier also, "now one party has moved the Supreme Court again. A lot of people want an early hearing. That is all I have to say."
Another BJP leader Sanjeev Balyan reacted to the apex court order, he said, "I am amazed at the priority list of the Supreme Court. I am of the opinion that Ram temple should be built. Let the government look at all possibilities. Just having an Ordinance is not enough."
Working president of Vishwa Hindu Parishad Alok Kumar said that the Hindus cannot wait eternally for a court judgement on the Ayodhya land dispute case and asked the government to bring a law for building a Ram temple.
"The Supreme Court has once again adjourned the hearing. This fortifies the VHP's stand that the solution to the Ram Janambhoomi issue is not in eternally waiting for hearing of appeals pending for over seven years. We reiterate our request to the Union government to enact a law to clear the way for building a grand temple of Lord Ram at his birthplace in Ayodhya," Kumar told PTI.
This may be done in the coming winter session of Parliament, the head of the RSS affiliate said, adding that the Hindutva organisation will intensify its campaign for such a legislation if the government does not act.
The organisation has called a two-day 'Dharam Sansad', a meeting of seers, on January 31 and February 1 next year to discuss the Ram temple issue. This will be held on the sidelines of the Kumbh Mela in Allahabad.
On 18 October, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat set the political agenda for 2019 Lok Sabha election and said the Ram temple must be built at Ayodhya. In his Shastra Puja celebration speech at RSS headquarters in Nagpur, Mohan Bhagwat said that, "Chahe jaise ho mandir banna chahiye (it doesn't matter how, the temple must be built). The RSS chief had even demanded that the Narendra Modi government should bring a bill in Parliament for construction of a Ram temple at Ayodhya.
Reacting to the apex court's order, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi said, "If it's the Supreme Court's decision then we’ll have to follow it." Meanwhile, Bajrang Dal leader Vinay Katiyar questioned why wasn't the apex court hearing the case on a daily basis. Alleging that Congress was pressurising the top court, Katiyar told News18, "It seems that everything is happening due to pressure by Congress and that these dates are because Kapil Sibal and Prashant Bhushan do not want it to be heard daily."
The Supreme Court on Monday fixed the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute cases for the first week of January next year before an appropriate bench, which will decide the schedule of hearing.
A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said the appropriate bench will decide the future course of hearing in January next year on the appeals filed against the Allahabad High Court verdict in the Ayodhya land dispute case.
"We will fix the date of hearing of the Ayodhya dispute case before the appropriate bench in January," the bench, which also comprised Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph, said.
Earlier, a three-judge bench, by a 2:1 majority, refused to refer to a five-judge constitutional bench the issue of reconsideration of the observations in its 1994 judgment that a mosque was not integral to Islam. The matter had arisen during the hearing of the Ayodhya land dispute.
An apex court bench headed by then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said the civil suit has to be decided on the basis of evidence, adding that the previous verdict has no relevance to this issue.
The bench had fixed the batch of appeals for final hearing today.
As many as 14 appeals have been filed against the high court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77 acres of land be partitioned equally among three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Updated Date: Oct 29, 2018 23:43:12 IST