New Delhi: A three-judge
bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia,
is hearing a petition right now and is expected to decide today on
whether verdict on the Ayodhya land dispute case should be deferred or
not.
Last week, on September 23, a Supreme Court interim order had restrained the Allahabad High Court from pronouncing the verdict in the four title suits. The verdict of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court was to have been delivered a day later. (The Ayodhya dispute: A timeline)
The petition filed before the Supreme Court by retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chand Tripathi has sought that the verdict be deferred to allow the contesting parties to arrive at an out-of-court settlement.
Mukul Rohtagi who is representing Tripathi has argued that the Centre "has acted merely as it is a receiver of the property"- a proactive stand has to be taken by the Centre, he said.
Last week, on September 23, a Supreme Court interim order had restrained the Allahabad High Court from pronouncing the verdict in the four title suits. The verdict of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court was to have been delivered a day later. (The Ayodhya dispute: A timeline)
The petition filed before the Supreme Court by retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chand Tripathi has sought that the verdict be deferred to allow the contesting parties to arrive at an out-of-court settlement.
Mukul Rohtagi who is representing Tripathi has argued that the Centre "has acted merely as it is a receiver of the property"- a proactive stand has to be taken by the Centre, he said.
Last week, for the first time in the 60-year-old case, the union
government was made a party to the case and its views will be presented
in court by the Attorney General.
Rohtagi argued that the Supreme Court "must experiment to come up with an innovative solution."
A main party in the case- the Nirmohi Akhara - also wants the court to defer the verdict by three months to allow for reconciliation. The Akhara said it would request the Supreme Court to ask for the verdict to be deferred for three months to allow for a solution through negotiations.
But the Central Board of Wakfs, the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board and the All-India Hindu Maha Sabha have pleaded for vacating the stay and allowing the High Court to pronounce the verdict.
"The difference between Mandir group and Masjid group are so diverse. That's why we want the judgement to be pronounced," said Anoop Chaudhri, senior lawyer for Sunni Central Board of Waqf Board, UP.
There are 27 respondents in the case.
If the Supreme Court gives a go-ahead for verdict today, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will have two days to deliver the verdict. This is because one of the three judges on the bench hearing the title suit, DV Sharma, retires on October 1.
The retiring judge can be given an ad hoc extension, but if that does not happen and verdict is not pronounced before October 1, arguments could have to be heard again and the verdict could be further delayed in the 60-year-old case.
The three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which is hearing the petition today, comprises of Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice KS Radhakrishnan.
Rohtagi argued that the Supreme Court "must experiment to come up with an innovative solution."
A main party in the case- the Nirmohi Akhara - also wants the court to defer the verdict by three months to allow for reconciliation. The Akhara said it would request the Supreme Court to ask for the verdict to be deferred for three months to allow for a solution through negotiations.
But the Central Board of Wakfs, the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board and the All-India Hindu Maha Sabha have pleaded for vacating the stay and allowing the High Court to pronounce the verdict.
"The difference between Mandir group and Masjid group are so diverse. That's why we want the judgement to be pronounced," said Anoop Chaudhri, senior lawyer for Sunni Central Board of Waqf Board, UP.
There are 27 respondents in the case.
If the Supreme Court gives a go-ahead for verdict today, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will have two days to deliver the verdict. This is because one of the three judges on the bench hearing the title suit, DV Sharma, retires on October 1.
The retiring judge can be given an ad hoc extension, but if that does not happen and verdict is not pronounced before October 1, arguments could have to be heard again and the verdict could be further delayed in the 60-year-old case.
The three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which is hearing the petition today, comprises of Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice KS Radhakrishnan.
No comments:
Post a Comment