Muslim Law Board Wants Review Of Ayodhya Verdict, Petition will be failed Within A Month
NEW DELHI : The Supreme Court will be requested to review its landmark verdict in the Ayodhya temple-mosque dispute case, the Muslim Personal Law Board said today, announcing that a review petition will be filed within a month. “We cannot accept any land in lieu of the masjid,” the Law Board said today, referring to the top court’s decision to hand the disputed 2.77 acres for a temple and its order to grant 5 acres of land for a mosque at a prominent location in Ayodhya.
The land has been granted to the Sunni Wakf Board, which has said it is not going to challenge the court’s decision. The Wakf Board said it doesn’t want to “open a closed chapter” as such a move will lead to tensions.
But the Law Board, which was not a party in the case and helped the litigants financially and legally, said “Other Muslim litigants want review petition”.
Jamiat Ulema-i Hind, a prominent petitioner in case, has already said it is in favour of a review petition. Three litigants, including the Jamiat, have already been identified, who would file the review petition, the law board said.
The Wakf Board, however, is yet to take a call on accepting any land for a mosque. The Muslim Personal Law Board said under the Shariat laws, a mosque cannot be exchanged for money or land.
After the verdict on November 9, Zafaryab Jilani, a member of the Law Board and the lawyer for the Sunni Wakf Board, had said they were not satisfied with the verdict. “We think it is unjust… We can’t consider this justice,” Mr Jilani said.
But in an interview, Zafar Farooqui, the chairperson of the Sunni Waqf Board, had told NDTV that it had been “our clear stand from day one that we would abide by the Supreme Court’s verdict – whatever it may be”.
“Second, this issue has created a deep divide in our society over the years. Going for a review could have meant vitiating the atmosphere again,” Mr Farooqui had told NDTV.COMMENT
Under the rules, any three litigants in a case can ask the Supreme Court for a review of a verdict.
