{"id":3577,"date":"2018-09-28T06:32:47","date_gmt":"2018-09-28T06:32:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/?p=3577"},"modified":"2018-09-28T06:32:47","modified_gmt":"2018-09-28T06:32:47","slug":"a-top-court-decision-clears-way-for-ayodhya-hearing-from-october-29","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/a-top-court-decision-clears-way-for-ayodhya-hearing-from-october-29\/","title":{"rendered":"A Top Court Decision Clears Way For Ayodhya Hearing From October 29"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-3579\" src=\"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/ayodhya-dispute-case.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"286\" height=\"176\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Source-ndtv.com<\/p>\n<p>A Supreme Court decision on Thursday\u00a0has ensured that the case of whether or not to build a Ram temple at the site of a razed mosque in Ayodhya will be heard from October 29. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra refused to revisit a 1994 ruling that the government can acquire land that a mosque is built on &#8211; a decision that means that the politically-charged temple-mosque dispute can be taken up without any delay.<\/p>\n<p>In 1994, the court had ruled that namaz or prayers can be offered anywhere and a mosque is not essential. This allowed the government to take over the land where the 16th-century Babri mosque was razed in December 1992 by Hindu hardliners who believed it was built on Lord Ram&#8217;s birthplace.<\/p>\n<p>The ruling at the time was only related to the acquisition of land, the court said in a 2-1 judgement, refusing to refer the decision to a larger bench for review.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;All religions, all mosques and temples churches are equal. We have already noticed all religious places are liable to be acquired as per 1994 verdict,&#8221; said Justice Ashok Bhushan, reading out a judgement that quoted King Ashoka.<\/p>\n<p>One of the judges, Justice S Abdul Nazeer, disagreed and said whether a mosque is integral to Islam has to be decided considering belief and requires detailed consideration.<\/p>\n<div id=\"checked\"><\/div>\n<p>If it had decided to re-examine the decision, it would have delayed the Ayodhya dispute hearings even though it has no direct bearing on the title suit. The ruling BJP, which has promised its supporters a Ram temple at the disputed site, will hope for a decision before the 2019 national election.<\/p>\n<p>Muslim parties said the 1994 decision was unfair to them and played a role in the disputed land in Ayodhya being divided in 2010 into three parts by the Allahabad High Court: it split the land between Hindu and Muslim parties, though the main part was given to Hindus. The 2.77-acre land was to be partitioned equally between the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla (infant Ram).<\/p>\n<p>The high court decision has been challenged in the Supreme Court by Hindus and Muslims.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fb-background-color\">\n\t\t\t  <div \n\t\t\t  \tclass = \"fb-comments\" \n\t\t\t  \tdata-href = \"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/a-top-court-decision-clears-way-for-ayodhya-hearing-from-october-29\/\"\n\t\t\t  \tdata-numposts = \"5\"\n\t\t\t  \tdata-lazy = \"true\"\n\t\t\t\tdata-colorscheme = \"light\"\n\t\t\t\tdata-order-by = \"social\"\n\t\t\t\tdata-mobile=true>\n\t\t\t  <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t  <style>\n\t\t    .fb-background-color {\n\t\t\t\tbackground:  !important;\n\t\t\t}\n\t\t\t.fb_iframe_widget_fluid_desktop iframe {\n\t\t\t    width: 100% !important;\n\t\t\t}\n\t\t  <\/style>\n\t\t  ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Source-ndtv.com A Supreme Court decision on Thursday\u00a0has ensured that the case of whether or not to build a Ram temple at the site of a razed mosque in Ayodhya will be heard from October 29. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra refused to revisit a 1994 ruling that the government [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3579,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[770,2497,7,1647,2214],"class_list":["post-3577","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-ayodhya","tag-ayodhya-land-dispute-case","tag-supreme-court","tag-top-court","tag-wakilsahab"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3577","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3577"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3577\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3580,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3577\/revisions\/3580"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3579"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3577"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3577"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3577"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}