SC SETS AYODHYA TIMELINE
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the respective lawyers of the parties engaged in the Ram Janmabhoomi land dispute to conclude their arguments by October 18."Let us all make a joint effort to conclude the arguments by October 18. If necessary, the court may hear the case for an extra hour on Saturdays," said Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, a day after asking the lawyers to give estimate of time they will take in the case.
Urgency stems from the fact that the 5-judge Constitution bench hearing the case will have a month to write the judgment and pronounce it before November 17, the date on which CJI Gogoi retires. If the Bench is unable to give the verdict, a new Bench will have to hear the case afresh that the CJI does not want.Incidentally, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, who is to take over from the CJI, is part of the Bench and he will not be free until the Ayodhya ruling comes.
As such, the court may have to delay formation of the Constitution Bench which was expected to hear in the first week of October a bunch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 on Jammu and Kashmir.The only option before the CJI is to form another Constitution Bench
headed by Justice N V Ramana, who is No 3 in the pecking order, to hear the Article 370 case.
The Ayodhya Bench on Wednesday also disposed of a letter written by Justice F M Kalifulla-led three member mediation panel which had sought the court's nod to resume talks in the case. The Chief Justice said parties were free to resort to mediation through the court-appointed panel if they want and place the settlement, if reached, before the court, making it clear the hearing, at a very advanced stage, will continue without any interruption.The court is hearing appeals against the Allahabad High Court's 2010 judgment, partitioning the disputed land into three euqal parts to the deity Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Waqf Board.Appearing for the Muslim parties, on the 26th day of the hearing, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan cited a report of the historians to assert that the Babri Mosque was not the birthplace of Lord Ram.Justice D Y Chandrachud intervened to dismiss the methodology adopted for the report, noting that "at highest, this is an opinion, just an opinion" since it did not include findings of the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to be of higher evidentiary value.