E-Paper
Gyanvapi title dispute: HC refuses to disclose name of applicant who sought transfer of case from earlier judge
In the same application, the AIMC had also requested that the present proceeding may not be restarted till disclosure of name in the interest of justice.
The chief justice (CJ) of the Allahabad high court has rejected an application filed by the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee (AIMC), Varanasi, requesting the court to disclose the name of counsel or party, who had moved an application dated July 27, 2023 before the CJ for transferring the Gyanvapi mosque title dispute case from the judge, who had reserved judgment in the matter, to some other court.
In the same application, the AIMC had also requested that the present proceeding may not be restarted till disclosure of name in the interest of justice.
Rejecting the application by AIMC, which manages the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker observed, “Identity of the applicant who highlighted the procedural impropriety in hearing of the writ petitions is not material. What is material and important is the sanctity of the court proceedings itself.”
“The limited purpose served by the application dated July 27, 2023 is that the procedural impropriety arising in the proceedings got highlighted before the Chief Justice, on the administrative side, so that mandatory procedures for hearing of writ as per the rules of the court are complied with. It is otherwise open for any party to apply for inspection of records of the writ proceedings and ascertain the identity of the applicant who filed the said application dated July 27. Filing of an application on the judicial side or making of prayer to defer the hearing in the matters, for such reasons, appears to be wholly uncalled for,” the court added.
In the present bunch of petitions filed by AIMC and four others, the petitioners have challenged the maintainability of the suit filed before a Varanasi court that seeks restoration of a temple at the site where the Gyanvapi mosque exists. One petition, which is connected with these petitions, has also challenged a Varanasi court direction (dated April 8, 2021) to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a comprehensive survey of the entire premises of Gyanvapi mosque.
Earlier, the chief justice had passed an administrative order on August 11, 2023 to withdraw the cases relating to Gyanvapi from the earlier bench.
Later, on August 28, the chief justice had passed an order detailing the reasons why cases related to the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi land title dispute were withdrawn from a single judge, who had been hearing the matter, Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v Ist ADJ Varanasi and Ors, since 2021.
Subsequently, an application was filed by the petitioner AIMC on September 18, 2023, requesting the court to provide a copy of the complaint so that name and identity of the counsel as well as the party who had moved application dated July 27, 2023 before the chief justice for transferring the case to some other bench be known to all in the interest of transparency.
“And further prayed that in the meanwhile present proceedings be not restarted in the interest of justice,” the AIMC added.
Rejecting the application of AIMC dated September 18, the chief justice termed it as ‘bereft of any merit’, saying that facts, noted in the order of the court dated August 28, 2023, regarding procedural impropriety in conduct of the cases are otherwise not disputed. Hence, there is no occasion for the petitioner to pray for deferment of the proceedings on the grounds urged in the application dated September 18.
After giving the above reasons, the chief justice directed to list the bunch of cases relating to the Gyanvapi title dispute on October 4, 2023 for further hearing.
