Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, the president of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has filed a review petition against the Ayodhya Verdict that had awarded the ownership of the Ram Janmabhoomi to the Hindu side.
In its petition, the Muslim organization has accused the Supreme Court of condoning the ‘illegalities’ committed by the Hindu side. They have also accused the Supreme Court of issuing a ‘mandamus to destroy the Babri and build a Temple in its place’.
The 217 page review petition has been filed by Advocate Ejaz Maqbool.
“..The present Review Petition in this Hon’ble Court under Article 137 of the Constitution of India seeking review of the judgment and order dated November 9, 2019…”
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) December 2, 2019
The petition states, “That this Hon’ble Court by the impugned judgment and order has virtually granted a mandamus to destroy the Babri Masjid and to construct a temple of Lord Ram in the said place. The Hon’ble Court by virtue of the impugned order has though acknowledged few of the several illegalities committed by the Hindu Parties, particularly in 1934 (damaging the domes of the Babri Masjid), 1949 (desecrating the Babri Masjid) and 1992 (demolition of the Babri Masjid), but this Hon’ble Court has proceeded to condone the said illegal acts and has awarded the disputed site to the very party which based its claims on nothing but a series of illegal acts.”
The petition adds, “Further, this Hon’ble Court has in an attempt to balance the reliefs between the parties, while condoning illegalities of the Hindu parties, has allotted alternate land admeasuring 5 acres to the Muslim parties, which was neither pleaded nor prayed for by the Muslim parties.”
The petitioners alleged that the Court committed an “error apparent on record by passing the impugned judgment and order directing for a temple to be built at the disputed land, which virtually amounts to a mandamus to destroy, because had the Babri Masjid not been illegally demolished on December 6, 1992, the execution of the present order would have required the destruction of an existing mosque to make space for a proposed temple.” It was also claimed that the Supreme Court in its Ayodhya Verdict “failed to appreciate that there can be no lasting peace without justice and accountability.”
It was also claimed by the petitioners that the Ayodhya Verdict “erred in disregarding the basic principle that no person can derive benefit out of an illegality while granting title to the Hindu parties.” According to them, the Supreme Court also committed a mistake “by not appreciating that the structure in question had always been a mosque and had been in exclusive possession of the Muslims.” The petition also states that the Court equated “wanton acts of destruction and trespass committed by the Hindu parties to acts of assertion of claim over the disputed site.”
The review petition also demands that the Supreme Court issue a stay on its Ayodhya Verdict and directs the Central Government that no steps should be taken to fulfil its obligations under the verdict.
It is notable here that the Sunni Central Waqf Board, one of the litigant parties in the long-running case, had earlier made it clear that they will not file a review petition in the apex court.