New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to hear petitions challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, on February 17, even as the Central government is yet to submit its counter affidavit in the matter.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justices Sanjay Kumar, and K.V. Viswanathan will resume hearings on the case, as per the apex court’s cause list.
Mosque Committee Seeks Closure of Centre’s Right to Reply
The Committee of Management of Mathura’s Shahi Masjid Eidgah has moved an application urging the Supreme Court to bar the Centre from filing its response, citing intentional delays. The committee pointed out that despite an order from the top court on December 12, 2024, directing the government to submit a common counter affidavit within four weeks, the Centre has failed to comply.
The petition argues that the government’s inaction is obstructing those opposing the challenge to the law, as the Centre’s position would impact their submissions. It has urged the court to close the Union government’s right to file a reply before the upcoming hearing.
Background of the Case
The Places of Worship Act, 1991, bars the filing of lawsuits to reclaim religious sites or alter their character from what existed on August 15, 1947. It was challenged in March 2021 when a petition filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay contended that the Act violates fundamental rights.
The plea argues that:
- The law was enacted under the guise of ‘public order’, which is a state subject under the Constitution, making it unconstitutional for the Centre to pass such legislation.
- The Act prevents Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs from reclaiming their places of worship destroyed by historical invaders.
- While Ayodhya’s Ram Janmabhoomi was excluded from the Act, Lord Krishna’s birthplace in Mathura remains covered, making the law arbitrary and discriminatory.
Supreme Court’s Previous Interim Order
On December 12, 2024, a special bench led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna had passed an interim order restricting new lawsuits under the 1991 Act and preventing final or effective orders in pending cases until further notice. The court had also directed the Centre to file its response within four weeks, which has not been done. (Inputs With PTI)
