A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi will hear the Ayodhya matter on January 10.
A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi will hear the Ayodhya matter on January 10. Other judges on the bench include Justice SA Bobde, Justice NV Ramana, Justice UU Lalit and Justice DY Chandrachud.
During the hearing on January 4, the bench had posted the matter for hearing on January 10. Today, the Supreme Court said that the five-judge bench of the court will hear the matter on the next date of hearing.
- Gujarat Local Body Election Results 2021 Live: Counting of votes underway for 81 municipalities, 31 district panchayat, 231 taluka panchayat
- Assam Election 2021: Cast vote keeping in mind future of your children, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra tells Assam women
- West Bengal Polls: Congress leader Anand Sharma slams party's tie-up with Muslim cleric Abbas Siddiqui's ISF
Appeals against Allahabad High Court’s decision on September 30, 2010, accepting that the site was Lord Ram’s birthplace and ordered three-way division of disputed 2.77 acres, distributing a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara sect, the Sunni Central Wakf Board, UP, and Ramlalla Virajman — is pending since December that year.
On October 29 last year, the Supreme Court had refused to grant the Uttar Pradesh government counsel’s request to hear appeals in the case on an urgent basis. While hearing the case, the bench had ordered that the appeals be listed for the first week of January before an “appropriate bench” which would decide on the date of hearing.
A number of organisations have demanding early decision on the dispute. After top court’s refusal for an early hearing of the 14 pleas in the case, demands to request ordinance for construction of a Ram temple has increased.
Last year, the government had set aside a petition seeking time-bound hearing of the matter. On September 27, the court had also refused to refer the matter to a larger bench on grounds that an observation in its its 1994 ruling in the Ismail Farooqi case that “a mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz (prayer) by Muslims can be offered anywhere, even in open” needed reconsideration.
The Supreme Court had also rejected Kapil Sibal’s plea to defer the case till Lok Sabha elections 2019. Sibal and other senior lawyers Rajiv Dhavan and Dushyant Dave had urged the apex court to postpone the hearing as it could lead to repercussions before general elections.