Write Comment     |     E-Mail To a Friend     |     Facebook     |     Twitter     |     Print

Ayodhya Order "Unjust", Will Decide On Review Plea: Muslim Group Lawyer

A five-acre plot at an alternative site in Ayodhya will go for the building of a mosque, said the five-judge bench of the top court, led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.

NEW DELHI: The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board has expressed dis-satisfaction with the verdict of the Supreme Court that awarded the 2.77 acres of disputed land to Ram Lalla for the construction of a temple and said an alternate five-acre plot will be given for a temple. They said they will hold a meeting and take a call on whether a review petition should be filed.

In its landmark judgment to the century-old politically sensitive case, the Supreme Court today said  temple will come up on the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya and the Central government has three months to set up a trust to build it.

A five-acre plot at an alternative site in Ayodhya will go for the building of a mosque, said the five-judge bench of the top court, led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi. The location of this alternate site will be decided by the Central or the state government, the bench said.

"We think it is unjust... We can’t consider this justice. We are not criticizing all parts of judgment," said Zafaryab Jilani, the lawyer of the Muslim group.

"We respect the order and appeal to citizens to maintain peace. There shall be no protests from any side. It is nobody’s victory or loss. I can only say that the judgment is not satisfactory and not as per our expectations," he added.

The court said it had gone by the findings of the Archaeological Survey of India.

Mr Jilani said the crux of judgment -- the disputed land -- has been given to Suit No. 5 plaintiff. The land of the inner courtyard has also given to the other side, he said.

Ayodhya’s 16th Century mosque was razed in 1992 by right-wing activists who  believed that a temple marking the birthplace of the Lord Ram had to make way for the mosque of the Mughal emperor. The court had earlier questioned if there was any proof that the Lord Ram’s birth took place at the disputed site.