New Delhi: The Allahabad high court has stayed proceedings in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath Temple land dispute case, afoot at a Varanasi civil court. The stay will include the order by the court that called for a ‘survey’ of the mosque premises by the Archaeological Survey of India, Bar and Bench has reported.
The judge, Justice Prakash Padia, said that the proceedings were “prima facie bad in law” as the high court had already reserved judgment on a case related to the dispute.
The petition was moved by senior advocate S.F.A. Naqvi, and advocates Ahmed Faizan and Punit Gupta, who questioned the maintainability of the suit before the civil court even though the high court was already seized of a related case.
Along with the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya – which was demolished in 1992 – Hindutva groups had called for various mosques to be converted to temples. The Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Idgah in Mathura – both of which are next to temples – feature at the top of this list.
On April 8, 2021, a Varanasi civil court had ordered the ASI to ‘survey’ the Gyanvapi Mosque located next to the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, after petitioners representing the temple claimed that the land on which the mosque stood actually belonged to them.
As The Wire had reported then, the Varanasi court’s order upended the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which declared that “the religious character of a place of worship existing on August 15, 1947, shall continue to be the same as it existed on that date” and that “no suit, appeal or other proceeding with respect to…such matter shall lie on or after such commencement in any court, tribunal or other authority.”
Also read: ‘Cloud on Ayodhya Verdict’: Mosque Moves SC to Intervene in PIL Challenging Places of Worship Act
The civil court had held that during the survey and other research, Muslims must still be allowed to offer namaz at the site. However, the public and media will not be allowed to watch or be briefed about the survey proceedings and the results of the survey are to be given to the court in a sealed cover, the court had said.
The order by the civil court was opposed by the Gyanvyapi Mosque management committee, Anjuman Intazamia Masazid, which had moved an urgent application before the Allahabad high court to stay the April 8 order.
The petitioner said that the civil court judge while passing the order had acted in the “most arbitrary manner” against “judicial discipline”, as the matter has been pending before the high court, constraining him from passing orders as the judge concerned did so when the temple side moved an interim application before the civil court.
