‘Deliberate delay’: Mathura mosque panel accuses Centre of stalling SC hearing on Places of Worship Act

The application pointed out that by an order dated September 9, 2022, the top court had “noticed that even though the notice in writ petition… was issued on 12.03.2021, the Union of India had not filed its counter affidavit/reply and the Union of India was granted two weeks’ time to file its counter affidavit/reply. However, the Union of India failed to file its counter affidavit/reply as directed…”

It added that by an order dated October 12, 2022, “the time to file a counter affidavit by the Union of India was extended by this Hon’ble Court and the Union of India was directed to file its counter affidavit on or before 31.10.2022. However, the Union of India again failed to file its counter affidavit on or before 31.10.2022 as directed by” the court.

The application also referred to an order dated December 12, 2024 in which the top court “noticed that the Union of India had not filed its counter affidavit/reply for over three years and directed that a common counter affidavit/reply be filed by the Union of India within four weeks. Even though the said period of four weeks has expired, the Union of India has failed to file its counter affidavit/reply once again.”

The Committee said that since the apex court has fixed February 17, 2025 to hear the petitions next, “it would be in the interest of justice if the right of the Union of India to file its Counter Affidavit/Reply/Pleadings/Submissions, is closed.”

The top court is seized of a clutch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 1991 Act as well as some seeking its enforcement.

Hearing the petitions on December 12, 2024, a bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan barred civil courts across the country from registering fresh suits challenging the ownership and title of any place of worship and from ordering surveys of disputed religious places until further orders.

The bench also noted that the Centre is yet to file its response in the matter, and asked the government to file its reply in four weeks time. “We want the Union of India’s position to be brought on record,” the CJI had observed.

It had asked the Centre to furnish copies of its response to the petitioners and to upload the e-copy online so that those can be downloaded.

The 1991 Act was brought in by the then Congress government of Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao at a time when the Ram temple movement was at its peak. The Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.

The dispute relating to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was kept out of its purview.

Hearing the suits related to the dispute over the Gyanvapi mosque complex, the Supreme Court had earlier taken the stand that “the whole question is really on what is the religious character as on August 15, 1947” and determining this is not barred under the Act.