E-Paper
A ploy to further delay temple construction, say Nyas, VHP
The Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) have termed the All India Muslim Personal Law Board’s (AIMPLB) decision to file a review petition against
The Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) have termed the All India Muslim Personal Law Board’s (AIMPLB) decision to file a review petition against the Supreme Court’s November 9 judgment in the Ayodhya land dispute case as a ploy to further delay construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya.
In its meeting on Sunday, the AIMPLB decided to file a review petition in the apex court.
“We have made all preparations for construction of Ram temple. The AIMPLB’s decision to file a petition is a ploy to further delay construction of the temple,” said Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, head of the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, on Sunday evening.
“During hearing of the case, they (AIMPLB) tried on several occasions to delay the final verdict. Now, when the verdict has been delivered, they are again trying to delay the construction of temple,” said Das.
Reacting on the Board’s decision, Sharad Sharma, regional spokesperson of VHP who operates from Karsevakpuram in Ayodhya, said: “The AIMPLB’s decision to file review petition is an insult to all those Muslims who have accepted the Supreme Court’s decision.”
“When negotiations were going on for an out-of-court settlement between the Hindu and Muslim litigants, the AIMPLB rejected the negotiations saying that it will accept the Supreme Court’s verdict,” said Sharma adding, “Now, when the court has given its verdict, the AIMPLB has something else to say.”
Triloki Nath Pandey, Ram Lala’s next friend who represented Ram Lala Virajman in the Supreme Court, said: “The AIMPLB’s decision will have no effect. The Supreme Court’s decision in favour of Ram temple was unanimous. The review petition will not hold legal ground.”
Head of the Nirmohi Akhara Mahant Dhinendra Das said: “It is their (AIMPLB) personal decision. They can do anything. But we are satisfied with the court’s decision. We wanted Ram mandir and the court has paved the way for its construction.”
Iqbal Ansari, one of the Muslim litigants in the Ayodhya title dispute, boycotted the Board’s meeting in protest against its decision to go for a review.
“I have always maintained that I will accept the court’s decision whether it is in favour of a mandir or a mosque. I am personally against any decision to go for a review. This is their (AIMPLB) personal decision and not mine,” said Ansari.
