Ready to forgo one-third share in disputed Ayodhya land to Hindus: Shia Wakf Board tells SC

The Shia Wakf Board has told the Supreme Court that it is ready to forego its third in Ram Mandir for the Hindus

The Shia Wakf Board has told the Supreme Court that it is ready to forego its third in Ram Mandir for the Hindus
The Shia Wakf Board has told the Supreme Court that it is ready to forego its third in Ram Mandir for the Hindus

The Shia Wakf Board on Friday told the Supreme Court that it was ready to forgo one-third of 2.77 acres of disputed land allotted to it by the Allahabad High Court to Hindus for construction of a Ram Mandir at Ayodhya. The five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, which concluded hearing of arguments from the Hindus’ side, was told by the Shia Board that Mir Baki, a commander of Babur, was a Shia and was first ‘Mutawalli’ or caretaker of the Babri mosque as he had constructed it.

“I am supporting the Hindu side,” lawyer M C Dhingra, appearing for Shia Wakf Board, told the bench, also comprising justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer, on the 16th day of the hearing in the Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.

He said the high court, while dividing the disputed land into three equal parts, had given one-third share to Muslims and not to Sunni Wakf Board and hence, it wanted to give its share to Hindus on grounds including that Babri mosque was a Shia Wakf property. The lawyer representing the Wakf Board said that without prejudice to what Hindus have argued, Shias do not claim their right over the property under the doctrine of adverse possession as Shias were in possession of it till 1936 and moreover, the first and the last ‘Mutawalli’ were Shias and no Sunni was ever appointed caretaker.

Dhingra, however, said the disputed property was registered as Sunni Wakf without giving any notice to Shias and later the Shia Board lost the case in court in 1946 on the “slim ground” that it had appointed a Sunni Imam. “What is going to follow from this? Do we need to see all this,” the bench then asked.

“I am seeking leave to challenge the decision of the high court denying the right of Shia Wakf over the property,” Dhingra argued.  “You have filed a Special Leave Petition (appeal) challenging more than a 70-year-old order,” the bench said.

Arguments are set to resume on Monday.

Team PGurus

We are a team of focused individuals with expertise in at least one of the following fields viz. Journalism, Technology, Economics, Politics, Sports & Business. We are factual, accurate and unbiased.
Team PGurus

5 COMMENTS

  1. From the very “start”of the Ayodhya dispute Shias have always taken the stand that the mosque was built by a Shia and was run by Shias until 1946. Now the Shia Wakf Board has unequivocally declared their support in the Supreme Court for transfer of the entire land to Hindus to construct the temple for Lord Rama. Only some factions among Sunnis oppose transfer of the land to Hindus. They were emboldened by decades of support they received from the Congress and other self anointed “secular” political parties who never wanted this dispute solved because ending this confrontation would weaken their Muslim vote bank. It is hoped the Supreme Court will decide in favour of transfer of the entire land to Hindus possibly with some compensation for Muslims.

  2. Ready to forgo one-third share in disputed Ayodhya land to Hindus: Shia Wakf Board tells SC.
    If this is the kind of respect shown towards majority Hindus, better GOI declare Ayodhya, Mathura and Kashi must be freed on the lines of JKL 370 and 35A !!!

    India that is Bharat must be declared as a Hindu Nation to show anti-nationals their right place.

  3. Sir, 6 companies of BSF with IG BSF moved to Ayodhya, the Temple construction material is being cleaned and new material coming in workshop, the head of MP and UP ASI and their teams have been stationed in Ayodhya.
    Kuch bada hone wala hai

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here