The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed all petitions seeking review of its November 9 Ayodhya judgment where it ruled that the entire disputed land be handed over to a trust to be constituted for construction of a Ram temple and that Muslims be given five acres for building a mosque.
A five-judge Constitution bench, comprising Chief Justice of India SA Bobde and Justices DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S Abdul Nazeer, and Sanjiv Khanna, took up 18 review petitions in chamber. Justice Khanna replaced former CJI Ranjan Gogoi in the five-judge bench.
Those who had filed review petitions include Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, legal heir of original litigant M Siddiq and Uttar Pradesh president of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, five petitioners “supported” by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha and 40 “concerned citizens”, including economist Prabhat Patnaik, historian Irfan Habib and ex-civil servant Harsh Mander.
With the rejection of these review petitions, the consequential request of parties for an open court hearing on these pleas also get dismissed.
Of these eighteen review petitions, nine were filed by those who were parties in the original matter. The other nine are filed by third parties. The apex court, however, refused to entertain nine review pleas filed by those who were not a party to the original litigation.
On December 2, the first plea seeking review of Ayodhya verdict was filed in the apex court by Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, legal heir of original litigant M Siddiq and also the Uttar Pradesh president of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind. The last petition was filed by the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, seeking review of the five-acre plot to the Muslim side.
The petition by 40 persons said they ere “deeply aggrieved” by the verdict as it “errs in both fact and law”.