The Supreme Court of India has apparently backed off from its earlier suggestion to resolve the Ayodhya title suit case through mediation and denied urgent hearing in the case.
The Supreme Court of India has apparently backed off from its earlier suggestion to resolve the Ayodhya title suit case through mediation and denied urgent hearing in the case. On March 21, the apex court had even said it was ready to mediate if the contesting parties decided to resolve the matter amicably. The court had then asked Swamy to report the development on March 31. However, the court on Friday didn’t seem interested in mediation from its side. The contesting parties can still do so by reaching a mutual consensus among themselves.
BJP leader and lawyer Subramanian Swamy had approached the court on March 21 to seek an urgent hearing in the case. The apex court had then surprised many by offering to mediate. The SC bench, which also comprised of Justices DY Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, asked Swamy to talk to the litigating parties for appointing a negotiator for settling the case via mediation. On Friday, however, the top court not only refused to fix a date for the hearing but also questioned the locus
On Friday, however, the top court not only refused to fix a date for the hearing but also questioned the locus standi of Swamy in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits.
Chief Justice of India, Justice JS Kehar was apparently surprised to know that Swamy was not a petitioner in the case. Swamy told the court that his faith was affected by not being able to pray at the site. “Today the SC asked me if I was a party in the Ayodhya dispute. I said I had made clear that I was on Fundamental Right to worship issue,” Swamy tweeted later.
Only way for Muslim leadership not to create bad blood with Hindus is to agree unilaterally to build a mosque elsewhere.
— Subramanian Swamy (@Swamy39) March 31, 2017
Now that the Supreme Court has refused to fix a date for next hearing in the case, and apparently backed off from its earlier mediation offer, here we take a look at the reason why the apex court has taken such decision and what Subramanian Swamy can do now.
Why Supreme Court refused to fix date of hearing in Ayodhya title dispute case
Justice Kehar said the apex court doesn’t have time to hear the Ram Temple case on an urgent basis.
On Thursday, the top court had set up a three-judge bench to hear Triple Talaq issue on an urgent basis during the summer vacation.
What Subramanian Swamy can do now
The Supreme Court decision today surprised Swamy and he termed it as the success of those who pursue delay tactics in the matter. Swamy tweeted: “The judges said they have no time and adjourned the matter. In other words those who wanted delay succeeded. I will try another route soon.”
At present, only two ways seem feasible which Swamy can pursue. a) He can urge the government to form a Constitutional Law for the creation of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. However, such a law may set a bad precedent or trigger some other social challenges. b) The second and the best possible way is to sort out the matter by talks with the other party in the case. Probably, this is what he wants now as this tweet shows: “Only way for Muslim leadership not to create bad blood with Hindus is to agree unilaterally to build a mosque elsewhere.”
However, Swamy is a maverick lawyer. One doesn’t know, he might be having another idea.