'Let SC take a 100 years to decide', says Subramanian Swamy on Ayodhya case
New Delhi, Jan 10: Soon after the Supreme Court adjourned hearing in the Ayodhya case till January 29, BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, who has been involved in the matter for decades, on Thursday said let the apex court "take a 100 years to decide", but the disputed land cannot be given to Sunni Waqf Board.
A 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement had directed that the 2.77-acre land be partitioned equally among the three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla. This has been challenged in the Supreme Court. Today, the Supreme Court adjourned hearing on the Ayodhya appeals after Justice Uday U Lalit recused himself from hearing the case.
"Let SC take a 100 years to decide theTitle. SC cannot give Sunni WKf Board their ordinary property since it will affect my fundamental right to pray hence an ordinary right cannot overrule a fundamental right (sic)," Swamy tweeted.
Let SC take a 100 years to decide theTitle. SC cannot give Sunni WKf Board their ordinary property since it will affect my fundamental right to pray hence an ordinary right cannot overrule a fundamental right— Subramanian Swamy (@Swamy39) January 10, 2019
The case was adjourned after it was pointed out by the Muslim petitioners that Justice UU Lalit, who was part of the Constitution Bench headed by the CJI, had represented Kalyan Singh in a related case.
The five judges were expected to work out a date and schedule for the hearings. But before it could do that, senior lawyer Rajeev Dhawan, who is representing one of the parties, pointed that Justice UU Lalit had appeared in a contempt case to the Ayodhya dispute.
Once this was pointed out, Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi said that all brother judges are of the opinion that it would not be appropriate for him to take part in the hearing of the Ayodhya land dispute. The CJI said if Justice Lalit was not to take part further, then the hearing needs to be postponed. The case will now be heard on January 29 and a new Bench would need to be constituted.