Muslim bodies will seek Ayodhya verdict review

AIMPLB, JUH to oppose alternative land for mosque through 4 litigants

LUCKNOW:TWO prominent Muslim bodies declared on Sunday that they will seek a review of the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-babri Masjid title suit and rejected the court’s offer of alternative land for the demolished mosque, indicating that the decades-old communal dispute was far from resolved.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the Jamiat Ulama-i-hind (JUH) said they opposed the unanimous SC decision last week favouring the construction of a Ram temple at the 2.77-acre site in Uttar Pradesh’s Ayodhya town.

“The land of the mosque belongs to Allah and under the Sharia [Islamic laws], it cannot be given to anybody,” AIMPLB secretary Zafaryab Jilani told reporters after a meeting of the board in Lucknow.

The two bodies also decided not to accept five acres of land for the construction of a mosque and said it was against Islamic laws to take anything in lieu of a religious place. “It was a fight for the title and not for an ordinary piece of land. It’s our constitutional right to save our religious place,” Jilani added.

The AIMPLB was not a party to the case but said it will rope in three litigants — Mohammad Umar Khalid, a resident of Ayodhya town; Misbahuddin, a resident of Ayodhya district and Mehfusur Rehman, a resident of

Tanda town in Ambedkar Nagar district — to file the review petition. “We would abide by whatever decision the board takes. There are some inconsistencies in the verdict and I feel there is a scope for correction,” said Khalid.

The decision was immediately criticised by the Hindu groups, who said the review process was only a tactic to delay the construction of a Ram temple. “We have made all preparations for construction of Ram temple. The decision to file a petition is a ploy to further delay construction of the temple,” said Nritya Gopal Das, head of the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, which spearheaded the Ram temple movement.

Triloki Nath Pandey, the so-called “next friend” of the child deity Ram Lalla Virajman, said the AIMPLB’S decision will have no impact. “The Supreme Court’s decision in favour of Ram temple was unanimous. The review petition will not hold legal ground,” he said. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, an affiliate of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, said the AIMPLB’S decision was an “insult” to all Muslims who accepted the apex court’s decision.

Some Muslim litigants also struck a discordant note. The UP Sunni Central Waqf Board said it will stick to its original decision of not filing a review petition.

“The board’s stand remains the same. The Sunni Waqf Board will not go for the review petition,” said Zufar Farooqi, chairman of the body. The board has called a meeting on November 26 to decide on its response to the alternative plot for a mosque.

Iqbal Ansari, another litigant in the case, said he disagreed with the AIMPLB’S decision and boycotted the meeting. “I have always maintained that I will accept the court’s decision whether it is in favour of a temple or a mosque. I am personally against any decision to go for a review,” he said.