The hearing of the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute in Varanasi will take place in the Allahabad High Court on January 27. The High Court, while revising its order of January 20, said the interim order was not in progress.
A single-judge bench of Justice Prakash Padiya is hearing a petition filed against the order of Upper District Judge Varanasi on behalf of Anjuman Intajamia Masjid Varanasi in the dispute. The hearing could not be completed due to time constraints. The petition sought revocation of the civilism of Bhagwan Vishweshwar, filed in Varanasi, as a violation of Section 4 of the Upanasthala (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
On behalf of Kashi Vishwanath temple, it was said that there is continuous worship in and around the basement, so the petition should be dismissed while allowing illegal construction and renovation of the temple.
According to the case, on October 18, 1991, Swayambhu Lord Vishweshwar vs Anjuman Intejamia Masjid Varanasi Civil Case was filed. It has sought to declare the portion of the old temple and the Naubat Khana, including the construction above the basement, to be the property of Lord Vishveshwarnath, to allow Hindus to renovate the temple, and to declare the Muslim community’s occupation of the temple land illegal. Besides, illegal construction should be removed and the plaintiff should be given possession and permanent prohibition should be given on service, worship and interference in Raj Bhog.
The petitioner filed an objection under the Place of Worship Act of 1991, seeking to maintain the status of August 15, 1947 and dismiss the case. The Court decided the points whether the justice charge is sufficient and whether the suit is voidable as barred from Section 4. The plaintiff applied to withdraw these suit points. The petitioner objected to this.
Also Read: Delhi High Court allows British citizen to apply for new multiple-entry visa
The Court dismissed the case, which was barred in Section 4, against which the plaintiff filed a review Petition before the Additional District Judge, which the Court accepted and quashed the order of the civil judge.