Scribd
Upload
61 views

Ayodhya Dispute

The document summarizes the chronology of events in the Ayodhya dispute from 1528 to 2019. It then highlights key aspects of the Supreme Court's 2019 judgement, including: (1) Allotting the entire 2.77 acre disputed land for temple construction and ordering alternative land for mosque construction. (2) Ruling that the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment splitting the land was wrong. (3) Exercising powers under Article 142 to deliver a balanced judgment and ensure complete justice given the complex issues involved.

Uploaded by

Chaitanya Krishna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
61 views

Ayodhya Dispute

The document summarizes the chronology of events in the Ayodhya dispute from 1528 to 2019. It then highlights key aspects of the Supreme Court's 2019 judgement, including: (1) Allotting the entire 2.77 acre disputed land for temple construction and ordering alternative land for mosque construction. (2) Ruling that the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment splitting the land was wrong. (3) Exercising powers under Article 142 to deliver a balanced judgment and ensure complete justice given the complex issues involved.

Uploaded by

Chaitanya Krishna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Chronology of the Ayodhya dispute-

1528: First Mughal Emperor Babar is believed to have constructed Babri Masjid. The three-
domed mosque built by Mir Baqi, commander of Mughal emperor Babur, in 1528 is in the
Jaunpuri style.

1885: Mahant Raghbir Das moves Faizabad court seeking permission to construct a temple in
the vicinity of the Babri Masjid. The plea is declined.

1949: Idols of Lord Ram were mysteriously found inside the mosque. Violence broke out, and
the administration locked the premises.

1950s to 1960s - civil suit for disputed land was filed by Nirmohi Akhara, Central Sunni Waqf
Board, Ram Lalla

1992: Kar sevaks demolish Babri Masjid. Justice Liberhan Commission appointed to probe.

1993: P.V. Narasimha Rao government acquires 67 acres of land adjoining the disputed site. The
Supreme Court upholds the acquisition in its Dr. Ismail Faruqui judgment.

2003: ASI conducted excavations and submitted the report stating that remains of a large
structure existed before the Babri Masjid.

2010: High Court delivers a majority judgment for three-way partition of the disputed property
among Hindus, Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara.

2011: Parties appealed in S.C

2019: Resumed hearing & suggested mediation for amicable resolution and appointed
mediation committee headed by Justice F.M.I. Kalifulla.

Aug 2019: Mediation Failed, Court hearing resumed.

9 Nov 2019: 5 mem constitution Bench unanimously gave the entire 2.77 acres disputed site to
the Hindus.
Highlights of the S.C Judgement-

· Allotted the entire 2.77-acre disputed land for temple construction.Bench has ordered
the Centre to set up a board of trustees for construction of a temple at the disputed
place.

· ordered the central government to allot alternative five acres of land for constructing a
mosque to Sunni Waqf Board either in the surplus 67 acres acquired in and around the
disputed structure by the central govt or any other prominent place within the city of
Ayodhya.

· SC held that the Allahabad H.C 2010 judgement was wrong to divide the land.

· SC ruled that the Nirmohi Akhara suit was not maintainable(Law of Limitation within 6
yrs but it claimed after 10 years of locking of temple in 1959 ) and it has no shebait
rights (priestly rights). However, the court directed that in the Board of Trustees that will
be set up, the Nirmohi Akhara should be given appropriate representation.

· It said that the destruction of the mosque in 1992 happened in breach of SC orders. The
desecration of the mosque by placing idols in 1949 and its demolition was against the
rule of law.

ARTICLE 142 AND AYODHYA VERDICT


Article 142 gives an extraordinary power to the Supreme Court to do complete justice. This
power has been invoked many times by the court which forms an important aspect of Judicial
activism.

Supreme Court, in Ayodhya dispute, has exercised powers under Article 142 to pass various
orders

What is Article 142?

· Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to “pass such decree or
make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter
pending before it”.

· power under Article 142 can be exercised when the SC has to decide difficult cases
where adequate laws may not exist, or existing laws may not be adequate, in order to
deliver complete justice.

Earlier instances of invoking it:

1989- To provide relief to the thousands of victims affected by the Bhopal gas tragedy by
awarding compensation of $470 million to the victims.

2014- It was used to cancel allocation of coal blocks granted from 1993 onwards.

2016- For restoring the white marble of the Taj Mahal

Dec 2016- banning the sale of alcohol within a distance of 500 metres on national and state
highways across the country to curb accidents due to drunken driving.

Recent case where bureaucrats from the state of Punjab, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh were hauled
up for not controlling stubble burning and a slew of directions were passed by SC.

Importance of Art 142 under Ayodhya Verdict:

Because of complex story of dispute which involved RELIGION, HISTORY, LAW and to preserve
the balance, SC felt that the current laws were inadequate to deal with such complexities. So,
invoked Art 142.

· Dismissed the Waqf Board’s claim. Hence under Article 142 it directed the central
government to grant an alternate site of five acres within the area acquired by the
central government by way of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act in 1993 or
in any other prominent area in Ayodhya.

· Even though the Supreme Court had dismissed Nirmohi Akhada’s claim over the
disputed land, it invoked its power under Article 142 to direct the central government to
include the Nirmohi Akhada in the trust which would be responsible for the
management of the future temple land.

You might also like