Business Standard

HC to hear case related to Gyanvapi-masjid dispute on March 17

Image

Press Trust of India Allahabad

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday stayed a lower court's order to proceed with the hearing of a case related to the Vishwanath mandir-Gyanvapi masjid dispute and fixed March 17 as the next date of hearing in the case.

On February 4, the lower court held that since no interim order was extended in the last six months in writ petition related to the dispute, pending before the Allahabad High Court, stay is deemed to be vacated as per the decision of the Supreme Court in "Asian Resurfacing of Road Agencies case" and it can resume hearing of the case.

Justice Ajay Bhanot passed the order in a petition filed by Anjuman Intazamia Masjid, Varanasi.

 

The petitioner's contention was that it had earlier filed a plea related to the dispute and the court had granted a stay order in the case directing the lower court not to proceed in case pending before it.

However, the lower court wrongly interpreted the order of the Supreme Court and held that since the said order was not extended by the high court in the last six months, therefore, the stay is deemed to be vacated, and now it can resume hearing of the case, it said.

The Anjuman Intazamia Masjid had moved the court challenging orders passed by Additional Districts Judge, Varanasi, in 1997 and 1998 whereby its application challenging a civil suit filed by the Kashi Vishwanath Mandir Trust had been turned down.

The Trust had filed the suit in 1991 claiming that a temple was constructed by Maharaja Vikramaditya more than 2,000 years ago on the site, where the mosque had been later erected.

Alleging that the temple was demolished by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in 1664 and a mosque constructed on a part of the land with the remains of the razed place of worship, the Trust has sought removal of the Gyanvapi Masjid from the site and possession of the entire piece of land.

The Trust had contended in the original suit that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act was not applicable on its suit as the mosque was constructed over a partly demolished temple and even today many parts of the temple exist.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel

First Published: Feb 26 2020 | 10:26 PM IST

Explore News