The Supreme Court Friday agreed to hear a plea by the Gyanvapi mosque committee challenging the Allahabad High Court’s finding that pleas of the Hindu petitioners seeking possession of the disputed Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi mosque complex were maintainable and not barred by The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. A three-judge bench, presided by CJI D Y Chandrachud, said it will take up the plea along with other pending petitions arising out of the dispute. “We will tag this with the other Special Leave Petitions,” the bench, also comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, told Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi who appeared for the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, Varanasi. Ahmadi pointed out that the matter listed for hearing Friday was its appeal against the December 19, 2023 High Court order holding the suit of the Hindu petitioners as maintainable. Dismissing five petitions filed by the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and the mosque committee, the High Court, on December 19, 2023, set a six-month deadline for completion of proceedings before a Varanasi court in the 1991 suit. The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 mandates that the nature of all places of worship, except the one in Ayodhya that was then under litigation, shall be maintained as it was on August 15, 1947. The Act, brought in by the P V Narasimha Rao-led Congress government during the height of the Ram temple movement, was also meant to apply to the disputed Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple-Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura. The High Court, however, said that the Act does not define “religious character”, and it only defines “conversion” and “place of worship”. “What will be the religious character of the disputed place can only be arrived (at) by the competent Court after the evidences are led by the parties to the suit. It is a disputed question of fact, as only part and partial relief has been claimed of the entire Gyanvapi compound which comprises settlement plot Nos. 9130, 9131 and 9132,” the High Court said. The Supreme Court too had taken a similar position on the 1991 Act when other petitions arising out of the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute came up before it earlier and said the Act does not bar the determination of religious character of a place of worship. “Due to the interim order operating since 1998, the suit could not proceed. In the national interest, it is required that the suit must proceed expeditiously and be decided with utmost urgency with the cooperation of both the contesting parties without resorting to any dilatory tactics,” the High Court said. The High Court order came on five petitions filed by the Gyanvapi mosque committee and the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board. The petitions said that the original suit (Ancient Idol of Swayambhu Lord Vishweshwar and Others vs. Anjuman Intezamia Masajid and Another) filed in 1991 was not maintainable as it was barred by The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. Directing the Varanasi court to conclude the hearing in the original suit within six months, the HC said, “.the court below shall not grant unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.”
