4 min readLucknowJul 15, 2026 02:20 AM IST
First published on: Jul 14, 2026 at 10:24 PM IST
With both the Hindu and Muslim litigants in the Gyanvapi mosque dispute case refusing to take part in the Supreme Court-mandated mediation talks on Tuesday, it is now certain that the two sides will fight it out in the courts, preferring judicial adjudication over an out-of-court settlement.
The Supreme Court’s similar effort during a special Lok Adalat, scheduled to be held between July 22 and 25, is unlikely to bring any breakthrough.
The Gyanvapi mosque abuts the Kashi Vishwanath temple. The Hindu side claims that the mosque was built after the demolition of the Kashi Vishwanath temple during the Mughal period, while the Muslim side maintains that it is a legitimate Waqf property.
“The Gyanvapi matter is a hyper-sensitive one, and such disputes cannot be settled following mediation,” SM Yaseen, the joint secretary of Anjuman Intizamia Masajid, the caretaker of the 17th-century mosque in Varanasi, told The Indian Express.
Like the Hindu litigants, the Muslim side sent their lawyer to the district court on Tuesday to inform the three-member mediation committee that members of Anjuman Intizamia Masajid would not be taking part in the talks, mandated by the Supreme Court.
As part of an exercise to reduce the burden on courts, the Supreme Court had fixed July 14 to explore an amicable settlement in major religious site cases, including the Gyanvapi mosque. The three-member mediation committee, headed by an Additional District and Sessions Judge, is part of the Supreme Court’s ‘Supreme Court Action for Mediated Adjudication and Disputes
Harmonisation Across Nation’ (SAMADHAN SAMAROH) initiative aimed at encouraging settlement of pending cases.
The Supreme Court will be holding another similar four-day mediation sitting during a special Lok Adalat from July 22 to July 25.
“There are more than 35 litigants from the Hindu side, and practically, it is not possible to decide such a dispute with mediation. There is no point being part of such exercises since the matter would not have gone to the court or been left pending for so many years if both sides had the option to decide it mutually,” Yaseen said.
“The Hindu side, too, definitely is not ready to hold such out-of-the-court discussions because that would be a futile exercise. We all want the court to decide the case on merit,” he added.
Among the Hindu litigants, four women – Rekha Pathak, Sita Sahu, Lakshmi Devi, and Manju Vyas – accompanied their lawyer Madan Mohan Yadav to the court premises on Tuesday, saying they want complete possession of the disputed site.
“We informed the mediation committee that the Muslim side is an encroacher at Gyanvapi and should vacate the premises so that a grand Kashi Vishwanath temple can be built at the original Jyotirlinga site,” Yadav told mediapersons.
“The Muslim side said several similar matters are pending before the Supreme Court, and they would abide by the court’s verdict. They are not willing to accept mediation,” Yadav added.
Five years ago, a group of Hindu women, including Rakhi Singh, filed a petition in the Varanasi court seeking permission to worship goddess Shringar Gauri on the outer walls of the Gyanvapi mosque complex. These were the fresh litigants in an already pending 1991 dispute case being pursued by Anjuman Intizamia Masajid and Sunni Waqf Board, and other Hindu petitioners.
The Varanasi court ordered a survey of the mosque complex by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which, in its report, concluded that a Hindu temple existed before the construction of the mosque. The four Hindu women then moved the Supreme Court seeking the excavation and scientific survey of a sealed section of the mosque.
Earlier, parties in the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah in Mathura and Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid disputes had also indicated that they preferred judicial adjudication over an out-of-court settlement.
The Hindu side claims that the Gyanvapi mosque was built after the demolition of the Kashi Vishwanath temple during the Mughal period, while the Muslim side maintains that it is a legitimate Waqf property. (File Photo) 
Share
