Supreme Court Asks Centre To File Its Response To Pleas Challenging Places Of Worship Act By October 31

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Ajay Rastogi listed a batch of petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 on 14th November 2022. The court also directed the Union of India to file its response by 31st October 2022. The petitions have been filed against the Act inasmuch as it bars remedies against illegal encroachment on the places of worship and pilgrimages prior to August 15, 1947. In its last hearing, the court had directed the Union of India to file a response in two weeks. However, in today's proceedings, Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind supporting the Act, told the bench that no such response had yet been filed. The Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, appearing for the centre, submitted that the reply was still under consideration and another two weeks were required for the same. CJI Lalit stated that when the validity of a legislation was challenged, the stand of the Central Government was relevant.Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the law was passed without debates. He said that certain additional questions have been framed, which were not considered by the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya judgment which upheld the Places of Worship Act. Dr. Subramanian Swamy, appearing as part-in-person, submitted that the Centre should be asked to respond.The CJI asked the Solicitor General what was his personal view regarding the impact of the Ayodhya judgment on the challenge."Mr. SG, what is your personal view? Was the legislation covered in Ayodhya judgement?", CJI asked.SG replied, "it may not be covered by that".Ultimately, the bench adjourned the matter asking the Union of India to file a response by 31st October 2022. CJI UU Lalit narrated the order which reads as follows–"Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for petitioner, has formulated questions which in his view would arise and would be required to be considered by this court. On the last occasion, SG had prayed for some time to place his submissions on record by way of affidavit in response. He prays for further time of two weeks to do the needful. Let the affidavit in that behalf be filed before 31st oct 2022. Ms. Vrinda Grover submits that after the response filed by the SG she would also respond and may suggest any additional questions which may arise in the matter. Ms. Grover and any other counsel who wishes to place additional questions may inform Mr. Kanu Agarawal within 7 days. We have requested Mr. Agarwal to collate the questions so that the attention of the court can be focused on these questions. He shall share copies of compilation in digitised mode with all counsels. All counsels are requested to submit their submissions in writing. Counsels' submissions to be in 3 pages suggesting time required for arguments. List matter on 14th November 2022. Mr Sinha and Mr Suresh have suggested additional questions which may also be forwarded to Mr. Agarwal. Issue formal notice in all the matters."Questions Raised For Consideration by the Petitions1. Whether the parliament was legislatively competent to enact The Places of Worship (Special Provision) Act 1991 as the Act deals with subject matters mentioned in the State List (List-2) of 7th schedule of the Constitution which are all in the Exclusive domain of the State Legislatures?2. Whether the Act is violative of Article 14 in as much as it discriminates in a hostile manner by restricting the operation of the Act to all States other than the State of J&K?3. Whether the bar of conversion of places of worship imposed by Section-3 read with Section 2(b) is violative of Articles 14, 21, 25, 26 and 29(1) of the Constitution in as much as it assumes, contrary to settled law relating to dedication of temple and temple property to the Idol, which never dies, that seeking reclamation or restoration of the temples destroyed by Muslim invaders , specially by Aurangzeb, would amount to seeking conversion of the place of worship and thereby putting an imprimatur on the destruction of the Hindu temples and the building of structures on the temple land for offering prayers by another community? Whether this would amount to depriving the temples and the Idols of their property without any public purpose and would violate Article-300 A of the Constitution?4. Whether the Cut-off date 15-8-1947 fixed by Section 4(1 ) of the Act is discriminatory and manifestly arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 21, 25, 26, 29(1) of the Constitution of India as for approximately 4 centuries prior to the said date the people of India were not free and subjects of initially the Mughal invaders and thereafter of British imperialists and were not in a position to seek retrieval and reconstruction?5. Whether the second part of Section 4(2) which bars suits, appeals and other legal proceedings with respect to reclamation of place of...

Supreme Court Asks Centre To File Its Response To Pleas Challenging Places Of Worship Act By October 31

Padmakshi Sharma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Padmakshi Sharma

Supreme Court Asks Centre To File Its Response To Pleas Challenging Places Of Worship Act By October 31

Padmakshi Sharma

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Padmakshi Sharma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers