Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, a litigant in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case, moved the Supreme Court on Monday, 9 December, against the direction to allot a five-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque in Ayodhya.
Seeking a "limited review" of the apex court's 9 November verdict which cleared the way for construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya, ABHM became the first Hindu body to seek the review.
It has also sought deletion of findings declaring the disputed structure as a Mosque.
Separately, 40 persons, including rights activists, have jointly moved the top court seeking review of its verdict in the Ayodhya case claiming that the judgment “errs in both fact and law”.
A five-judge bench, headed by the then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, had in a unanimous verdict on 9 November decreed the entire 2.77 acre disputed land in favour of deity 'Ram Lalla' and also directed the Centre to allot a five-acre plot to Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque in Ayodhya.
ABHM has said in its review plea that findings recorded by the top court "terming the disputed structure as mosque is apparently not correct and against the evidence and material on record".
‘Muslims Not Entitled to 5 Acres’
While seeking a limited review of the verdict, it said: "Muslims have no right or title over the dispute structure and as such the five acres of land cannot be allotted to them" and "there was no pleading or any submission by any party for allotting such land to Muslims".
The plea said that the court had not "called upon Hindus" to clarify their position for the actions taken in the year 1949 and 1992 and the observations made against them "may be expunged".
“The court has not taken into consideration all these facts before condemning the action of devotees and has ordered to allot 5 acres land to Muslims for which they are not entitled to,” it said.
"It is historical fact that Hindus have suffered for the last more than 800 years and they had to face the dark days of slavery, firstly the atrocities committed by Muslim Rulers and thereafter by British Rulers. Now country is being governed by written Constitution," it said.
‘Deeply Aggrieved by SC Verdict’
In a separate plea seeking review of the judgement, the 40 persons, including historian Irfan Habib, economist and political commentator Prabhat Patnaik, activists Harsh Mander, Nandini Sundar and John Dayal, have said they are "deeply aggrieved" by the verdict passed by the apex court.
"The petitioners in this review petition, belong to various Indian faith traditions (including Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain, apart from people with atheist and agnostic convictions), and are bound by their shared profound commitment to the morality of the Indian Constitution," it said.
It has sought a full bench for hearing the review plea saying it is not merely a title dispute but a “contestation about the core of India’s constitutional morality, and the principles of equal citizenship, secularism, justice, rule of law and fraternity”.
On 6 December, six petitions were filed in the apex court seeking review of its 9 November judgement.
While five pleas were filed by Maulana Mufti Hasbullah, Moulana Mahfoozur Rehman, Mishbahuddin, Mohd Umar and Haji Nahboob, who are all supported by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the sixth one has been filed by Mohammad Ayub.
On 2 December, the first plea seeking review of Ayodhya verdict was filed in the apex court by Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, legal heir of original litigant M Siddiq and also the Uttar Pradesh president of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind.
. Read more on India by The Quint.RSS & BJP’s Nehru-Netaji ‘Cosplay’: Irony Dies a Thousand DeathsAyodhya Case: Hindu Body Seeks Review of 5-Acre Plot to Muslims . Read more on India by The Quint.