Plea In Supreme Court Challenges Allahabad HC's Order Dismissing PIL To Ascertain Nature Of Structure Found In Gyanvapi Mosque

A Plea has been moved before the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the appointment of a committee/commission headed by a judge of the high court or supreme court (present/retired) to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi campus.

It may be noted that the PIL plea in question was moved before the Allahabad HC in June 2022 seeking direction to a panel to ascertain whether a Shiva linga, as claimed by the Hindus had been found inside the mosque or if it is a fountain as being claimed by a few of the Muslims.

Read more about the High Court's order here: Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Seeking Formation Of Panel To Ascertain Nature Of Structure Found Inside Gyanvapi Mosque

Now, when the High Court dismissed the PIL plea, the all the 7 petitioners (who were also the petitioners in the PIL before the Allahanbad High Court) have now moved to the SC  through Advocate Satyajeet Kumar stating that the Allahadbad High Court had erred in dismissing the plea on merits, despite the fact that it had concluded that the petition at Lucknow Bench was not maintainable.

It may be noted that the High Court had, in its order, held that the Court sitting at Lucknow has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition filed at Lucknow regarding the subject matter situated at Varanasi since it does not fall under the Oudh region and that such a plea could be entertained before the Prayagraj Bench of the HC in view of the Allahabad High Court Amalgamation Order 1948.

In its plea before the Supreme Court, the Petitioners have also stated that after the emergence of the disputed structure inside the mosque, it was the duty of ASI to go on the spot to ascertain the nature of the structure impugned, however, since the same was not done, the petitioners had moved the High Court.

However, the plea further states that the high court, without calling any reply from the respondents and relying upon some loose documents submitted by the state law officer to the court, dismissed the petition on merits.

Further, the petitioners have also submitted that the Allahabad HC's bench which decided the case in question was improperly formed as one of the judges of the bench was a judge appointed under article 217 of the constitution and another was an additional judge appointed under article 224 of the constitution.

"...so the submission of the petitioners is that judgment is nullity in the eyes of law as it was of the bench two unequal judges. It was the bench of two unequal judges as one judge who has been appointed under article 217 will continue to serve till the age of 62 years and another judge who has been appointed under article 224 will return to bar if his services are not regularized/ confirmed," the Plea avers.

The petitioners have also averred that the PIL plea was moved before the High Court in the national interest as the communal tension was at its peak and so, the plea adds, it was the duty of the high court to adjudicate it after giving the time to the respondents to file the reply, however, sadly, the same was dismissed on unsustainable grounds.

The plea also submits that the pendency of a few civil suits regarding the subject matter of a case, cannot be ground for dismissal of a writ petition which has been filed for enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed by part 3 of the constitution.

This submission has been made in response to the reasoning given by the High Court in its order that since several Suits are pending in the Civil Court at Varanasi regarding the structures existing in Gyanvapi Parisar, Varanasi, therefore, the instant Writ Petition concerning the same subject matter was not liable to be entertained by the High Court.

In light of this, the plea before the Supreme Court argued that the high court had wrongly dismissed the writ petition which was filed for the protection of fundamental rights guaranteed to the Hindus by article 25 of the constitution.

Consequently, the plea seeks a grant of special leave to appeal against the impugned Judgment and final Order dated 19.07.2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Bench at Lucknow in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No 350 of 2022.

As an interim measure, the petitioners have prayed that the ASI may be directed to ascertain the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi campus.

Read more about the High Court's order here: Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Seeking Formation Of Panel To Ascertain Nature Of Structure Found Inside Gyanvapi Mosque