A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer additionally rejected intervention functions by 17 others together with the one filed by 32 eminent individuals, together with famend filmmaker Shyam Benegal, actress Aparna Sen, columnist and author Anil Dharker and social activist Teesta Setalvad who steered that the disputed land be put to “secualr use” moderately than dividing it on non secular strains.
It was an irony of types for Swamy, who was instrumental in requesting the SC on March 21 final yr for an early listening to of the Ayodhya dispute, triggering an uncommon proposal from then CJI J S Khehar-led bench for an amicable negotiated settlement. Placing the dormant situation pending within the SC for seven years on the entrance burner, Justice Khekhar had even made a proposal to be mediator to carry the opponents to the negotiation desk.
However the hype subsided simply 10 days later, as on March 31 final yr, the bench expressed its anguish at Swamy for not revealing that he was not a celebration to the land dispute however a mere intervener. On August 11, the SC mounted December 5, 2017 for commencing listening to, however on that day, vociferous protests about early listening to was made by counsel who steered that or not it’s listed after July 2019. The argument was that the case must be handled after the subsequent Lok Sabha elections. It got here up for listening to once more on February eight and the SC mounted listening to on March 14.
On Wednesday, all events — the Sunni Wakf Board and plaintiffs belonging to Muslim neighborhood, deity Ram Lalla by guardian Nirmohi Akhara and Uttar Pradesh authorities — argued in unison that this was a dispute between events and interveners had no position within the listening to of appeals, which challenged the September 30, 2010 judgment of Allahabad excessive court docket deciding the fits pending since 1949 and ruling a three-way equal division of the land between Sunni Wakf Board, the deity and Nirmohi Akhara.
After rejection of his intervention software, Swamy forcefully argued that it was the court docket which had transformed his petition, in search of safety of his elementary proper to worship Lord Ram at his birthplace in Ayodhya, to an intervention software in the principle Ayodhya land dispute case. He argued that his elementary proper was superior to the events’ proper over land. “If you’re not allowing my intervention, then revive my writ petition,” Swamy mentioned.
The bench agreed, revived Swamy’s petition and mentioned it might be heard individually by “an acceptable bench”. That assuaged Swamy. Nevertheless, the bench’s firmness to not entertain any non-party earlier than the HC as an intervener noticed strenuous makes an attempt by senior advocate C U Singh to maintain alive the applying filed by 32 eminent individuals in search of secular utilisation of the disputed land as a substitute of constructing a temple or a mosque.
Singh mentioned the nation had seen the horrendous results of communalisation of the problem and these eminent individuals steered a “center path”. The bench requested, “How can a center path be present in a land dispute?” With the dismissal of all intervention functions, the SC will now hear solely those that had been events earlier than the HC within the title fits.