Nyas hails Centre’s move, Nirmohi Akhara objects
The Centre’s application to the Supreme Court for return of undisputed land to its original owners in Ayodhya has evoked a mixed reaction in the temple town.lucknow Updated: Jan 30, 2019 19:12 IST
The Centre’s application to the Supreme Court for return of undisputed land to its original owners in Ayodhya has evoked a mixed reaction in the temple town.
While the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas welcomed the move, the Nirmohi Akhara objected to the Centre’s petition.
Among the Muslim litigants, one said he had no objection to the step but another questioned the timing of the petition and warned of a 1992-like situation in Ayodhya.
Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, head of the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, said in Ayodhya on Tuesday, “If the Centre gets back the land, the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas will request the government to hand over the land to us, so that we start construction of Ram Mandir.” The Nyas had spearheaded the Ram temple movement in the 1980s and 1990s.
But, Mahant Dinendra Das of the Nirmohi Akhara said: “The Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas is not a petitioner in the case. If the Centre gives land (67 acre) to the Nyas, then Hindu litigants in the case will come face-to-face on the issue.”
Prabhat Singh, spokesperson for the Nirmohi Akhara, said: “There was no need for the Centre to file this petition in court. I think the Modi government took the step in view of 2019 Lok Sabha polls. The government wants to convey the message to people that it could go to any extent for Ram Mandir.”
“Since the beginning of the Ayodhya dispute, it was the Nirmohi Akhara that was fighting the case with the Sunni Central Waqf Board for possession of land. The Centre must give the land to us,” said Singh.
Ram Lalla Virajman, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Central Waqf Board, are the three original petitioners in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case.
Pointing out that the step had come before VHP’s Dharma Sansad in Prayagraj on January 31 and February 1, some seers said it appeared to be aimed at pacifying the agitated saints who wanted the Centre to bring an ordinance in Parliament for construction of Ram Mandir.
Mahant Satyendra Das, head priest of the makeshift Ram Janmabhoomi temple, also said he had no objection to the Centre’s petition.
“The dispute is only over 2.77-acre land. The Centre can take back the remaining 67-acre land. But Ram Mandir will only be constructed when dispute over 2.77 acre land is resolved,” he said.
Iqbal Ansari, Muslim litigant in the Ayodhya title suit dispute in the Supreme Court, said, “I do not have any objection. The dispute was over the land on which (Babri) mosque had existed. The Centre is free to take back the remaining 67-acre land. But till the dispute is resolved in the Supreme Court, Ram Mandir cannot be constructed.” Iqbal Ansari’s father Hashim Ansari was the oldest litigant in the case before his death in July 2016. After Hashim Ansari’s death, Iqbal Ansari became a party in the case.
Haji Mehboob, another Muslim litigant in the dispute, questioned the timing of the petition and accused the BJP of using the Ram Mandir issue for gaining political mileage before 2019 Lok Sabha polls.
“What is the need of this petition? When the entire land (2.77 acre and 67 acre) has been acquired, then let the court decide its fate,” said Mehboob.
“If any such step is taken in Ayodhya then the town could witness a repeat of the 1992 like situation,” he said.
Meanwhile, Karsevakpuram, local headquarters of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), and the Maniram Das Chhavni Peeth were abuzz with activity as the news of Centre’s latest move reached here.
Seers associated with the VHP assembled at the Karsevakpuram to get details of the sudden move.
First Published: Jan 30, 2019 19:12 IST