The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Friday the issues relating to the Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.

A notice in this regard was put up on the apex court website which said that the matter will be heard by a five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

The matter will come for the first time on Friday since March 8 order by which the top court had referred the decades-old politically sensitive case for <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-orders-mediation-in-ayodhya-case-appoints-three-member-panel-201901">mediation by a panel</a> headed by former apex court judge FM I Kalifulla for exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement.

Spiritual guru and founder of Art of Living Foundation Sri Sri Ravishankar and senior advocate Sriram Panchu, a renowned mediator, are the other two members of the panel of mediators.

The panel was asked by the apex court to hold in-camera proceedings and complete it within eight weeks.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Friday the issues relating to the Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case. A notice in this regard was put up on the apex court website which said that the matter will be heard by a five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Friday the issues relating to the Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case. A notice in this regard was put up on the apex court website which said that the matter will be heard by a five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer. The matter will come for the first time on Friday since March 8 order by which the top court had referred the decades-old politically sensitive case for mediation by a panel headed by former apex court judge FM I Kalifulla for exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement. Spiritual guru and founder of Art of Living Foundation Sri Sri Ravishankar and senior advocate Sriram Panchu, a renowned mediator, are the other two members of the panel of mediators. The panel was asked by the apex court to hold in-camera proceedings and complete it within eight weeks.

Supreme Court to hear Ayodhya land dispute case on Friday

The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce order on Friday on whether to refer Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case for mediation for amicable settlement.

A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi on Wednesday had reserved the order after hearing various contesting parties.

Hindu bodies except Nirmohi Akhara have opposed the suggestion of the apex court to refer the issue for mediation, while Muslim bodies have supported it.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce order on Friday on whether to refer Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case for mediation for amicable settlement.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to pronounce order on Friday on whether to refer Ayodhya's Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case for mediation for amicable settlement. A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi on Wednesday had reserved the order after hearing various contesting parties. Hindu bodies except Nirmohi Akhara have opposed the suggestion of the apex court to refer the issue for mediation, while Muslim bodies have supported it.

Supreme Court to pass order on whether to refer Ayodhya land dispute for mediation on Friday

Ayodhya land dispute: SC reserves order on court-monitored mediation

The Supreme Court on Friday said that an appropriate bench constituted by it will pass an order on January 10 for fixing the date of hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute title case at Ayodhya.

During the last hearing on October 29, the apex court had turned down the appeals filed by around 14 petitioners against&nbsp;Allahabad high court's 2010 judgement which divided the land into three equal parts to the Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh - the three parties in the case.

In a hearing led by the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, the court had also dismissed the requests for early hearing in the title dispute case and concluded, "We have our own priorities. Whether hearing would take place in January, March or April would be decided by an appropriate bench".

The court had earlier rejected the proposal for sending the title case for a larger bench and also refused to reconsider its 1994 verdict in which it had observed that a "mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz by Muslims can be offered anywhere, even in open".

The court had resumed the hearing in the case in 2017 after a break of around seven years.&nbsp;

The Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has gained momentum in recent years. The issue is likely to play an important role in determining the votes of a particular community in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls.

While the Bharatiya Janata Party has time and again assured the construction of the temple, the issue will likely not get a concrete layout before the 2019 Lok Sabha polls.

In a recent interview, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has clarified that his government will not take any step in building the temple until the court pronounces its judgement.

“Let the judicial process take its own course. Don't weigh it in political terms. Let the judicial process be over. After the judicial process is over, whatever be our responsibility as a government, we are ready to make all efforts,” PTI reported PM Modi as saying.

Prime Minister’s comments have come at a time when the other Hindutva organisations were demanding for an ordinance for the early building of the Ram Temple.

The Bharatiya Janata Party rose to prominence in the 1990s after it exhibited active support for the construction of the Ram Temple. In the elections that followed, the party garnered huge support and votes from the core Hindu voters. &nbsp;However, even after nearly a decade, the party has not been able to deliver its promise to its voters.

Over the years the land dispute case has become one of the most debated issues in the country leading to escalated tensions in the political environment. The demolition of the mosque had resulted in severe riots in the country killing over 2,000 people.&nbsp;

Here is the series of events that led to the land dispute case in the country:

1528: Babri Masjid built by Mir Baqi, commander of Mughal emperor Babur.

1885: Mahant Raghubir Das files plea in Faizabad district court seeking permission to build a canopy outside the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid structure. Court rejects the plea.

1949: Idols of Ram Lalla placed under a central dome outside the disputed structure.

1950: Gopal Simla Visharad files suit in Faizabad district court for rights to worship the idols of Ram Lalla.

1950: Paramahansa Ramachandra Das files suit for a continuation of worship and keeping the idols.

1959: Nirmohi Akhara files suit seeking possession of the site.

1981: UP Sunni Central Waqf Board files suit for possession of the site.

February 1, 1986: Local court orders the government to open the site for Hindu worshippers.

August 14, 1989: Allahabad High Court ordered maintenance of status quo in respect of the disputed structure.

December 6, 1992: Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid structure demolished.

April 3, 1993: ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act’ passed for acquisition of land by Centre in the disputed area.

1993: Various writ petitions, including one by Ismail Faruqui, filed at Allahabad High Court challenging various aspects of the Act.

October 24, 1994: Supreme Court says in the historic Ismail Faruqui case that a mosque was not integral to Islam.

April 2002: High Court begins hearing on determining who owns the disputed site.

March 13, 2003: Supreme Court says, in the Aslam alias Bhure case, no religious activity of any nature be allowed at the acquired land.

March 14, 2003: Supreme Court says interim order passed should be operative till disposal of the civil suits in Allahabad High Court to maintain communal harmony.

September 30, 2010: High Court, in a 2:1 majority, rules three-way division of disputed area between Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

May 9, 2011: Supreme Court stays High Court verdict on Ayodhya land dispute.

February 26, 2016: Subramanian Swamy files plea in Supreme Court seeking construction of Ram Temple at the disputed site

March 21, 2017: CJI JS Khehar suggests out-of-court settlement among rival parties.

August 7, 2017: Supreme Court constitutes three-judge bench to hear pleas challenging the 1994 verdict of the Allahabad High Court.

August 8, 2017: UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells Supreme Court mosque could be built in a Muslim-dominated area at a reasonable distance from the disputed site.

September 11, 2017: Supreme Court directs Chief Justice of the Allahabad HC to nominate two additional district judges within ten days as observers to deal with the upkeep of the disputed site.

November 20, 2017: UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells Supreme Court temple can be built in Ayodhya and mosque in Lucknow.

December 1, 2017: Thirty-two civil rights activists file plea challenging the 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court.

February 8, 2018: Supreme Court starts hearing the civil appeals.

March 14, 2018: Supreme Court rejects all interim pleas, including Swamy’s, seeking to intervene as parties in the case.

April 6, 2018: Rajeev Dhavan files plea in Supreme Court to refer the issue of reconsideration of the observations in its 1994 judgement to a larger bench.

July 6, 2018: UP government tells the Supreme Court some Muslim groups were trying to delay the hearing by seeking reconsideration of observation in the 1994 verdict.

July 20, 2018 : Supreme Court reserves verdict.

September 27, 2018: Supreme Court declines to refer the case to a five-judge Constitution bench.&nbsp;

October 29, 2018: &nbsp;Newly constituted three-judge bench turns down appeal filed by 14 petitioners challenging the 2010 court verdict. Court also schedules hearing for the first week of January.

The Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has gained momentum in recent years. The issue is likely to play an important role in determining the votes of a particular community in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls.

The Supreme Court on Friday said that an appropriate bench constituted by it will pass an order on January 10 for fixing the date of hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute title case at Ayodhya. During the last hearing on October 29, the apex court had turned down the appeals filed by around 14 petitioners against Allahabad high court's 2010 judgement which divided the land into three equal parts to the Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh - the three parties in the case. In a hearing led by the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, the court had also dismissed the requests for early hearing in the title dispute case and concluded, "We have our own priorities. Whether hearing would take place in January, March or April would be decided by an appropriate bench". The court had earlier rejected the proposal for sending the title case for a larger bench and also refused to reconsider its 1994 verdict in which it had observed that a "mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz by Muslims can be offered anywhere, even in open". The court had resumed the hearing in the case in 2017 after a break of around seven years. The Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has gained momentum in recent years. The issue is likely to play an important role in determining the votes of a particular community in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. While the Bharatiya Janata Party has time and again assured the construction of the temple, the issue will likely not get a concrete layout before the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. In a recent interview, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has clarified that his government will not take any step in building the temple until the court pronounces its judgement. “Let the judicial process take its own course. Don't weigh it in political terms. Let the judicial process be over. After the judicial process is over, whatever be our responsibility as a government, we are ready to make all efforts,” PTI reported PM Modi as saying. Prime Minister’s comments have come at a time when the other Hindutva organisations were demanding for an ordinance for the early building of the Ram Temple. The Bharatiya Janata Party rose to prominence in the 1990s after it exhibited active support for the construction of the Ram Temple. In the elections that followed, the party garnered huge support and votes from the core Hindu voters. However, even after nearly a decade, the party has not been able to deliver its promise to its voters. Over the years the land dispute case has become one of the most debated issues in the country leading to escalated tensions in the political environment. The demolition of the mosque had resulted in severe riots in the country killing over 2,000 people. Here is the series of events that led to the land dispute case in the country: 1528: Babri Masjid built by Mir Baqi, commander of Mughal emperor Babur. 1885: Mahant Raghubir Das files plea in Faizabad district court seeking permission to build a canopy outside the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid structure. Court rejects the plea. 1949: Idols of Ram Lalla placed under a central dome outside the disputed structure. 1950: Gopal Simla Visharad files suit in Faizabad district court for rights to worship the idols of Ram Lalla. 1950: Paramahansa Ramachandra Das files suit for a continuation of worship and keeping the idols. 1959: Nirmohi Akhara files suit seeking possession of the site. 1981: UP Sunni Central Waqf Board files suit for possession of the site. February 1, 1986: Local court orders the government to open the site for Hindu worshippers. August 14, 1989: Allahabad High Court ordered maintenance of status quo in respect of the disputed structure. December 6, 1992: Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid structure demolished. April 3, 1993: ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act’ passed for acquisition of land by Centre in the disputed area. 1993: Various writ petitions, including one by Ismail Faruqui, filed at Allahabad High Court challenging various aspects of the Act. October 24, 1994: Supreme Court says in the historic Ismail Faruqui case that a mosque was not integral to Islam. April 2002: High Court begins hearing on determining who owns the disputed site. March 13, 2003: Supreme Court says, in the Aslam alias Bhure case, no religious activity of any nature be allowed at the acquired land. March 14, 2003: Supreme Court says interim order passed should be operative till disposal of the civil suits in Allahabad High Court to maintain communal harmony. September 30, 2010: High Court, in a 2:1 majority, rules three-way division of disputed area between Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla. May 9, 2011: Supreme Court stays High Court verdict on Ayodhya land dispute. February 26, 2016: Subramanian Swamy files plea in Supreme Court seeking construction of Ram Temple at the disputed site March 21, 2017: CJI JS Khehar suggests out-of-court settlement among rival parties. August 7, 2017: Supreme Court constitutes three-judge bench to hear pleas challenging the 1994 verdict of the Allahabad High Court. August 8, 2017: UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells Supreme Court mosque could be built in a Muslim-dominated area at a reasonable distance from the disputed site. September 11, 2017: Supreme Court directs Chief Justice of the Allahabad HC to nominate two additional district judges within ten days as observers to deal with the upkeep of the disputed site. November 20, 2017: UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells Supreme Court temple can be built in Ayodhya and mosque in Lucknow. December 1, 2017: Thirty-two civil rights activists file plea challenging the 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court. February 8, 2018: Supreme Court starts hearing the civil appeals. March 14, 2018: Supreme Court rejects all interim pleas, including Swamy’s, seeking to intervene as parties in the case. April 6, 2018: Rajeev Dhavan files plea in Supreme Court to refer the issue of reconsideration of the observations in its 1994 judgement to a larger bench. July 6, 2018: UP government tells the Supreme Court some Muslim groups were trying to delay the hearing by seeking reconsideration of observation in the 1994 verdict. July 20, 2018 : Supreme Court reserves verdict. September 27, 2018: Supreme Court declines to refer the case to a five-judge Constitution bench. October 29, 2018: Newly constituted three-judge bench turns down appeal filed by 14 petitioners challenging the 2010 court verdict. Court also schedules hearing for the first week of January.

Ayodhya land dispute case: A timeline

The Supreme Court on Friday is slated to resume hearing the Ayodhya-Babri Masjid land dispute case.

The apex court is hearing 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court that mandated a three-way division of the disputed site in Ayodhya.

The top court earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen, and Teesta Setalvad, in the case.

During the previous hearing, a bench, comprising of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer, had directed the registry not to entertain any intervention application in the Ayodhya case.

The top court also rejected the intervention plea of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy in the matter.

The Babri Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya in 1528, was, on December 6, 1992, demolished by Hindu Karsevaks, claiming that the mosque was constructed after demolishing a Ram temple that originally stood there. (ANI)

The top court earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen, and Teesta Setalvad, in the case

The Supreme Court on Friday is slated to resume hearing the Ayodhya-Babri Masjid land dispute case. The apex court is hearing 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court that mandated a three-way division of the disputed site in Ayodhya. The top court earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen, and Teesta Setalvad, in the case. During the previous hearing, a bench, comprising of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer, had directed the registry not to entertain any intervention application in the Ayodhya case. The top court also rejected the intervention plea of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy in the matter. The Babri Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya in 1528, was, on December 6, 1992, demolished by Hindu Karsevaks, claiming that the mosque was constructed after demolishing a Ram temple that originally stood there. (ANI)

Ayodhya land dispute: Supreme Court to resume hearing today

India&#39;s top court while deliberating on the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/resolve-ayodhya-dispute-through-dialogue-adityanath-backs-top-court-observations-14129">Ayodhya land dispute today asked</a> the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court to appoint new observers within ten days.

&quot;As the list is long, we think it appropriate that Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court shall nominate two persons from the cadre of additional district judges or special judges keeping in view the nature and tenor of the earlier orders passed in this case,&quot; the bench said.

In March, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/settle-ayodhya-dispute-amicably-supreme-court-13617">India&#39;s apex court had asked BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy</a> to settle the Ayodhya issue through negotiations which would be agreed upon by all petitioners and respondents.

Supreme Court had said if negotiations broke down then it would intervene and appoint a mediator for a peaceful resolution.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court had on April 19 ordered <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/babri-masjid-demolition-case-cbi-court-frames-charges-against-advani-manohar-joshi-uma-bharti-16223">prosecution of BJP leaders LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi</a>, Uma Bharti Bharti, and other accused of criminal conspiracy in the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case.

Supreme Court had earlier said if negotiations broke down then it would intervene and appoint a mediator for a peaceful resolution

India's top court while deliberating on the Ayodhya land dispute today asked the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court to appoint new observers within ten days. "As the list is long, we think it appropriate that Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court shall nominate two persons from the cadre of additional district judges or special judges keeping in view the nature and tenor of the earlier orders passed in this case," the bench said. In March, India's apex court had asked BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy to settle the Ayodhya issue through negotiations which would be agreed upon by all petitioners and respondents. Supreme Court had said if negotiations broke down then it would intervene and appoint a mediator for a peaceful resolution. The Supreme Court had on April 19 ordered prosecution of BJP leaders LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti Bharti, and other accused of criminal conspiracy in the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case.

Appoint new observers within 10 days in Ayodhya land dispute case: SC to Chief Justice Allahabad HC

ayodhya-land-dispute

Ayodhya Land Dispute, News on Ayodhya Land Dispute, stories on Ayodhya Land Dispute, articles on Ayodhya Land Dispute, Ayodhya Land Dispute stories at Wion, Ayodhya Land Dispute news, Ayodhya Land Dispute latest news