English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Ayodhya dispute: Nirmohi Akhara opposes Centre’s plea for transferring surplus land to owners

Published

on

Ayodhya dispute

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]While last ditch closed-door mediation efforts are on for resolving the Ayodhya dispute, one of the litigants in the case, Nirmohi Akhara, today (Tuesday, April 9) moved the Supreme Court opposing the Centre’s plea seeking return of 67.390 acre of “non-disputed” acquired land around the disputed Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid site to original owners.

The Centre on Jan 29, asked the apex court to allow it to restore the acquired “superfluous” excess land – the major chunk of the land except the 0.313 acres on which the Babri Masjid stood – to the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, one of the parties in the title suit which is leading the campaign for construction of the Ram Mandir.

The Nirmohi Akhara, in its fresh plea, has opposed the Centre’s application by which it had sought modification of the Supreme Court’s 2003 order to allow it to return to original owners the 67.390 acre of “non-disputed” acquired land around the disputed Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya.

The application has said that the Centre has proposed returning of acquired land to Ram Janambhoomi Nyas and that there are many temples on the acquired land and their rights would be affected if the land is returned to one party.

The Akhara said the acquisition of land by the Centre has already destroyed many temples managed by the organisation and hence it wants the court to decide the title dispute, news agency ANI added.

In its plea, the Centre said it had acquired 67 acres of land around the 2.77 acres disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site. In 2003, the apex court had ordered that the status quo be maintained with regard to the acquired 67 acres of land around the disputed site.

The Centre argued in its application that the Supreme Court’s judgment in Dr M Ismail Faruqui and Ors Vs Union of India (October 24, 1994), which upheld the Constitutional validity of the Acquisition of Certain Areas of Ayodhya Act, 1993, under which the 67.703 acres were acquired, had also established that the “interest claimed by the Muslims was only over the disputed site of 0.313 acres where the disputed structure stood before its demolition”.

“It is respectfully submitted that the acquisition took place in the year 1993 and 25 years have passed, the original landowners whose land, which were not in dispute but were still acquired, are entitled to get it back and the Central government is duty bound to restore/revert/hand over the same land,” said the Centre’s application that was filed with the apex court registry, on January 28.

The prayer in the application reads: “Permit the Central government to restore/revert/hand over back superfluous/excess vacant land (other than the disputed land measuring 0.313 acres) to the owners/occupiers from whom the respective lands were acquired under the Act of 1993”.

“The Hon’ble Court be pleased to modify the order dated 31.3.2003 passed in the captioned matter so as to enable the central government to determine the exact extent of land required from out of the superfluous/excess land to ensure that successful party in the dispute pending regarding the ‘disputed land’ can have proper access to and enjoyment of rights in the disputed land. This applicant undertakes that each and every concern expressed by this Hon’ble Court in Ismail Faruqui (supra) and other judgments referred to above will be scrupulously taken care of,” the application states further.

The Ayodhya title dispute reached the Supreme Court after appeals were filed against a 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment in the matter. The high court ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya. The land was to be divided equally between the Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Central Wakf Board, Uttar Pradesh and Ramlalla Virajman.

The Supreme Court has referred the decades-old title dispute for in-camera mediation. The five-judge bench headed by CJI Gogoi constituted a three-member mediation panel headed by former SC judge Justice F M Kalifullah to resolve the issue. The other members of the panel include spiritual guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Senior Advocate Sriram Panchu.

The ruling BJP which released its manifesto yesterday asserted that it will make all necessary efforts within the framework of Constitution for “expeditious construction” of a Ram temple in Ayodhya. “We reiterate our stand on Ram Mandir. We will explore all possibilities within the framework of the Constitution and all necessary efforts to facilitate the expeditious construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya,” the Sankalp Patra read.

Handing over the ‘surplus’ land would enable the beginning of preliminary groundwork for construction of the Ram Mandir even before the dispute is decided. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad had welcomed the Centre’s move. In a press statement, the VHP had said that the land under litigation, where the disputed structure existed, admeasures only 0.313 acres out of the total 67.703 acquired by the government in 1993.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Pawan Khera faces fresh setback as Supreme Court refuses relief in passport row case

Congress leader Pawan Khera faces fresh setback as Supreme Court refuses interim relief and directs him to seek bail from Guwahati High Court.

Published

on

Pawan Khera

Congress leader Pawan Khera suffered another legal setback on Friday after the Supreme Court of India declined to extend protection in a case linked to his remarks about Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife.

A bench of the apex court refused to interfere with an earlier order that had stayed the transit anticipatory bail granted to Khera by the Telangana High Court. This decision leaves the Congress leader open to possible arrest by Assam Police in connection with the case.

During the hearing, Khera’s counsel sought interim protection, but the court declined the request and advised him to approach the appropriate court in Assam for relief. The bench clarified that the Guwahati High Court should decide any bail plea independently and on its merits.

“Am I a terrorist?” remark during hearing

While seeking protection, Khera’s legal team expressed concern over the urgency of the situation. In court, his counsel remarked, “Am I a terrorist?” highlighting the plea for temporary relief until a fresh bail application could be filed.

The Supreme Court also raised concerns over the submission of incorrect documents during the proceedings, adding another layer to the legal complications faced by the Congress leader.

Case linked to remarks on CM’s wife

The case stems from a press conference held earlier this month, where Khera made allegations regarding the citizenship status and financial assets of the Assam Chief Minister’s wife, Riniki Bhuyan Sharma.

He had claimed that she possessed multiple passports and owned undisclosed overseas properties. These allegations were strongly denied by the Chief Minister’s family, who termed them fabricated and misleading.

Legal battle intensifies

Earlier, the Telangana High Court had granted Khera temporary transit anticipatory bail, allowing him time to seek relief from a competent court in Assam. However, the Supreme Court stayed that order following a challenge by Assam authorities, escalating the legal battle.

With the latest ruling, Khera is now expected to move the Guwahati High Court for anticipatory bail as the case continues to unfold.

Continue Reading

India News

Congress suspends 5 Haryana MLAs over cross-voting in Rajya Sabha polls

Congress suspends five Haryana MLAs for cross-voting in Rajya Sabha elections, citing serious indiscipline and anti-party activities.

Published

on

The Congress has suspended five of its MLAs in Haryana for cross-voting during the recent Rajya Sabha elections, taking disciplinary action over what it described as “anti-party activities”.

The move came after the state unit reviewed the conduct of certain legislators during the polls, where some were found to have voted against the party’s authorised candidate.

Five MLAs suspended after disciplinary process

According to party sources, the MLAs were issued show-cause notices seeking an explanation for their actions. After reviewing their responses, the Congress disciplinary committee recommended suspension.

The decision was approved by the party leadership, including Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, and has been implemented with immediate effect.

Party calls it ‘grave indiscipline’

Haryana Congress chief Udai Bhan said the action was necessary to uphold party discipline, stressing that defying the official party line during elections weakens organisational unity.

He said the party takes such violations seriously and will continue to act against any form of indiscipline.

Leadership backs strict action

Senior Congress leader and Leader of Opposition Bhupinder Singh Hooda supported the decision, saying it was taken after due consideration.

He noted that while Rajya Sabha elections are conducted through an open ballot system, allowing legislators some flexibility, the party retains the authority to initiate internal disciplinary action in cases of deviation.

Background

The action follows cross-voting reported during the recent Rajya Sabha elections in Haryana, which led to internal concerns within the party. The development has highlighted organisational challenges and prompted the leadership to take corrective steps to reinforce discipline.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

on

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com