E-Paper
Safe evaluation of ‘Shivling’: HC grants ASI more time for reply
Petitioners Laxmi Devi and three others filed this civil revision petition, challenging a Varanasi court order that rejected the demand for carbon dating and scientific determination of the purported ‘Shivling’ found during a court-mandated survey of Gyanvapi mosque premises on May 16, 2022.
PRAYAGRAJ The Allahabad high court on Thursday granted eight more weeks to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for filing its response to clarify whether the carbon dating of the object (purported Shivling) found inside the Gyanvapi mosque could damage it or safe evaluation of its age can be done.
The petitioners — Laxmi Devi and three others — have filed the present civil revision petition, challenging a Varanasi court order that had rejected the demand for carbon dating and scientific determination of the purported ‘Shivling’ found during a court-mandated survey of Gyanvapi mosque premises on May 16, 2022.
On Thursday, the counsel for the ASI sought more time to file its response. Accepting his request, Justice JJ Munir fixed March 20, 2023, as the next date for hearing of the matter.
Earlier, at one stage on November 21, the counsel for the ASI had made an oral submission before the high court, stating that the ASI was still contemplating with its experts as to what methods could be adopted to determine the age of the purported ‘Shivling’. In view of it, he had sought further time of three months to submit ASI DG’s opinion as to whether a safe evaluation of the age of the purported ‘Shivling’ could be done by adopting a scientific methodology.
The petitioners challenged a Varanasi court’s October 14 order, rejecting Hindu worshippers’ plea for conducting a scientific probe of the ‘Shivling’.
The high court had on November 4 sought the response of ASI in the matter and directed the ASI DG to submit his opinion whether investigation of the said structure, if examined through carbon dating, ground-penetrating radar (GPR), excavation and other methods adopted to determine its age, nature and other relevant information, is likely to damage it or a safe evaluation about its age can be done.
In addition, the high court had in its November 4 order also issued notices to Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIMC), state government, district administration and other respondents in the case.
