Gyanvapi Mosque Survey An Attempt To Disrupt Communal Harmony, Violates Places Of Worship Act : Mosque Committee Tells Supreme Court

"An attempt to disturb the communal peace and harmony and in contravention to the Places of Worship Act" the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Management Committee has argued before the Supreme Court while challenging the survey ordered by a Varanasi court in Gyanvapi Mosque premises on a plea by a few Hindu devotees.The present special leave petition has been filed challenging the recent order of the Allahabad High Court refusing to interfere in Varanasi Court's order directing the survey work to continue in the Gyanvapi mosque-Kashivishvanath temple premises.It may be noted that after an urgent listing of the case was sought, a bench led by CJI NV Ramana had on Friday directed the case to be listed before a bench presided over by Justice DY Chandrachud, without fixing a specific date for the hearing.The present dispute pertains to the land where Gyanvapi Mosque is situated in Varanasi and has been in courts since 1991. In 1991 a suit was filed by devotees of the Kashi Vishwanath temple near which the Gyanvapi Mosque is situated alleging that the Mosque was built after a Lord Vishweshwar's temple was destroyed by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.Another suit was filed in 2021 by female devotees and worshippers of Lord Shiva, practicing the vedic sanatan hindu dharma before Civil Senior Judge, Varanasi seeking "restoration of performance of rituals at principal seat of an Ancient Temple" at the Gyanvapi mosque area"The dispute has now reached the Apex Court after multiple orders having been passed by both the Civil Court in Varanasi and the Allahabad High Court since 1991 on pleas by both the Hindi devotees and Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Varanasi and others. The proceedings in the 1991 suit has been stayed by the Allahabad High Court.Grounds of Challenge before Supreme Court:Way To Circle Around The Stay On Suit Proceedings: The petitioner has argued that the High Court failed to note that the respondents' application seeking local inspection of the premises was filed to circle around a stay on the proceedings by a coordinate bench of the High Court.Further, it is an attempt to disturb the communal peace and harmony and is in contravention to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The petitioner has pointed out that considering its challenge to order dated 08.04.2021 passed in the 1991 suit directing ASI inspection, a single judge bench of the High Court had on 9th September 2021 granted a stay on the inspection order and further proceedings in the 1991 suit.Suit being barred by the provisions of Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991: While arguing that the suit filed is barred by the provisions of Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, it has been argued that the petitioners' application seeking rejection of plaint for being barred by the Act should have been heard by the court before proceeding further in the matter.Therefore the three orders passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Varanasi on 18th April 2021 and 5th and 8th April 2022 regard to the inspection were in excess of jurisdiction and against the scheme of Places of Worship Act.It may be noted that the 18th August 2021 order was an ex parte order allowing application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to make local inspection of the property, the 5th April order was rejection of Mosque management's objections to appointment of Advocate Commissioner and the 8th April order was directing appointment of Advocate Mishra as the Advocate Petitioner.These three orders were also challenged by the present Petitioner before the High Court by a Miscellaneous Petition, where the impugned order was passed by the High Court refusing to interfere.2021 Suit An Abuse Of Process of Law:The Mosque management has submitted that with proceedings pertaining to the dispute being sub-judice before the High Court, the 2021 suit is an abuse of process of law.The petitioner management has therefore also sought a stay of proceedings in the 2021 suit in the present special leave petition.It has been pointed out that in the original suit of 1991, an application was filed for survey of premises in dispute by the ASI, which though allowed by the Court was later set aside by a coordinate bench of the High Court through order dated 09.09.2021, granting a stay upon the order and further proceedings of the original suit.It's Settled Law That Local Inspection Is Made By Court In Cases Where Its Unable To Arrive At A Conclusion:The petitioner has argued that the High Court should have appreciated that it is a settled law that local inspection or Commission by court is made only in those cases where on the evidence led by the parties, Court is not able to arrive at a just conclusion either way or where the court feels that there is some ambiguity in the evidence which can be clarified by making local inspection or Commission.According to the petitioner, the same cannot be claimed as a right by any party.Advocate Commissioner For Local Inspection...

Gyanvapi Mosque Survey An Attempt To Disrupt Communal Harmony, Violates Places Of Worship Act : Mosque Committee Tells Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

Tags