Ayodhya verdict: More join anti-review brigade

Lucknow, Nov 21(HS): Though the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board has decided to file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of its judgement on the disputed land in Ayodhya, more Muslim bodies and leaders have come out to oppose the move and favour an end to the century-old dispute. However, there is larger support to proposal for non-acceptance of five-acre land for construction of mosque at another site.

The Court has asked the government to provide this land for peaceful co-existence of the two communities in the area which was in the eye of the storm. Muslims living in the town and adjoining areas who always wanted the dispute to end as early as possible are against a review petition. The family of one of the oldest litigant headed by Iqbal Ansari would not like the issue to be dragged on.

But the Personal Law Board has taken the matter in a different light and will seek a review. The date of filing of petition has not been announced but it is likely to be done in the first week of next month. The Court had pronounced its judgement on November 9. A review plea can be made within 30 days of the order.

The community is divided in two sects, Shia and Sunni, and in both the sects there are prominent leaders who are now against the review. Heads of central boards of both the sects have already expressed their opposition. Some other leaders would also not like to go for it. Chairman of the the Shia board Wasim Rizvi has gone to the extent of saying that he had made a five-acre land demand which the Court has accepted. He is ga-ga over the order.

The  Sunni Central Waqf Board is divided down the middle. Besides chairman Zafar Farooquoi, three other members out of total eight, have, come out in the open against the review decision. They are not equally divided on alternative land issue. More are not in support of land close to the site for the mosque which was demolished in 1992.

Larger number of community members would not like land for demolished mosque at another site and would like to rebuild the mosque at the same site because transfer of mosque land for any other purpose was “unislamic”.

Like Asaduddin Owaisi of AIMIM, a good many in the community consider allotment of land at another site a “khairat” which they do not need.

The Court and all others agree that a mosque at the site was built in 1528 though there is a dispute on the builder. It has been also agreed that it was desecrated in 1949 and that Hindus have been offering prayers since then. As such, the mosque built at another site would be as holy, those in favour of Muslim place of worship at another site counter.

If the review petition is filed, it will be heard by the same bench. One member of the five-judge bench, Ranjan Gogoi, has retired. Another judge has to be appointed in his place. The bench may reject the petition or refer the case  to a higher seven-judge bench as has been done in Sabrimala temple (in Kerala) case. But that will only prolong the case.

If review petition is not entertained, a trust will be formed and a Ram temple built on the disputed 2.77 -acre land in Ayodhya, fulfilling the wish of crores of his worshippers.