With none yielding ground , Ayodhya dispute is back to square one

0
45

Lucknow: The  rejection of  plea made by Rajaya Sabha Bhartiya Janata Party member Subramanian Swamy for hearing of Ayodhya case on a priority basis  by the Supreme Court on Friday should not surprise any one. It was very much on the card after the two warring groups had failed to reach an agreement over out-of-court settlement suggested by the highest judicial body.

  Talks on the issue were destine to fail as convener of the Babri Masjid Action Committee and some others on the Muslim side had announced on the  day of  the  Court’s suggestion that they would only like to hear its verdict.
 
 The wait for next ten days was hardly required after that. The apex body had made the suggestion on March 21 and asked the warring groups to come to it again after ten days to convey outcome of the negotiations. Since there was no change of stand on either side , the issue was back to square one.
 
 The hearing on a new date ( March 31) marked only one change: a clarification was made regarding the status of Swamy in this case. It was made clear  that he is not a party. So, he has no locus standi in this dispute. Never- say- die man has promised to explore some other avenue to raise the issue.
 
 As the Court has refused to hear the case on a day-to-day basis, there is likely to be   much more delay in pronouncement of judgement. As it was filed in 1949 it is almost as old as our republic.
 
 It is partly for this reason that a Muslim organisation, Ram Mandir Muslim Kar Sevak Manch, has come out with the suggestion that the temple should be  built where it  ( in a make-shift manner)exists now .
 
       The new group joined by young members of the community wants the end of tension between the two communities and peaceful co-existence. Settlement of  dispute without any further delay is a pre-requisite, the group believes.
 
     The majority of Hindus believe that lord Ram was born at Ayodhya on the spot where the make-shift-temple exists. As such,they should be allowed the freedom to construct a temple there and  the mosque be built some where else in the same town of Ayodhya.
 
 To emphasise that these are not empty words,  hoardings with  slogans in this regard have been put up at many places in  Lucknow which is 80 kilometers away from the temple town and seat of power in the state.
 
 An early solution to the problem is also in the interest of the governments ,  at the Centre and  in the state. The pro-Hindu outfits which have backed these government to the hilt are likely to put more pressure now in view of the latest Court’s observation. It will divert attention which is neither good for the country nor its people.

loading...